
Class __E£_7L2^ 

Bookji^__6 

Copyright N'.\, 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 



SOUTH CAROLINA 
AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

1719-1776 



jH^^^ 



SOUTH CAROLINA 



AS A 



ROYAL PROVINCE 

1719— 1776 



BY 



W. ROY SMITH, Ph. D. 

ASSOCIATE IN HISTORY IN BRYN MAWR COLLEGE 



Neto York : 
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

LONDON : MACMILLAN & CO., LTD. 
1903 



THE LIBRARY OF 
CONGRESS, 

Two Copies Received 

SEP 16 1903 

. C«pyri£ht E.ntry 

cuss CL) XXc. No 

COPY B. 



COPYEIGHT, 1903, 

By the macmillan company, 



Set up and published September, 1903. 






Press of 

IHE New Era Printihc Compahv, 

Ladcasteii, Pa. 



'i™ 



PREFACE 

^ Students of the French Revolution have long since 
«>"come to realize that they must begin their researches 
^ at least as early as the reign of Louis XIV., if they 
^*^\^ould understand the real significance of that great 
^^l^ovement. The same is true of our American Revolu- 
^- tion. The historian who takes the Peace of 1763 as the 
J starting point will find himself involved in difficulties 
that are insurmountable. Without assuming, as Chal- 
mers does, that the colonists were all along consciously 
striving for independence, I think that we may safely 
affirm that the real history of the revolt dates from the 
founding of the first English settlement in Virginia. 
From that time until the final appeal to arms in 1775 
there was in every colony an unceasing struggle be- 
tween the representatives of the people and the repre- 
sentatives of prerogative interests. The general char- 
acter of the conflict was the same in all, a reproduction 
on a small scale of the constitutional history of the 
mother country. The object of this monograph is to 
trace the progress of the struggle in South Carolina, 
with the hope that it may throw some light upon the 
history of the American Revolution. 

The author desires to express his obligations to those 
who have aided him in the preparation of this work. 
Though but few can be mentioned by name, the ser- 
vices of all are held in grateful remembrance. He 



vi PREFACE 

feels especially indebted to Professor Herbert L. Os- 
good, of Columbia University, who suggested the sub- 
ject and lessened the labors of composition by his en- 
couragement and advice. 

Acknowledgment should also be made to the Hon- 
orable M. R. Cooper, formerly Secretary of State of 
South Carolina, and to Mr. Jesse T. Gantt and Mr. 
David Means of his office for courtesies extended while 
searching the colonial archives ; to Mr. Yates Snowden 
and Mr. August Kohn, of the Charleston Neivs and 
Courier, for assistance in securing access to the various 
collections in Charleston; to Mrs. M. B. Jackson, of 
Austin, Texas, for aid in revising and correcting the 
manuscript ; and to my friend. Dr. Chauncey B. Tinker, 
of Yale University, for reading the proof. 

W. Roy Smith. 
Bryn Mawb, Pa., 
May, 1903. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 
INTRODUCTION. The Proprietary Period (1670-1719) 

PAGE. 

Introduction. 

Unity of colonial history 1 

Plan of book 2 

Tlie Proprietary Period. 

Establishment and early development of the colony 3 

Three phases of proprietary rule 7 

Struggle between settlers and proprietors (1670-1700) .... 7 

Struggle between Churchmen and Dissenters (1700-1706) . 8 
Renewed struggle between settlers and proprietors (1706- 

1719) 11 

War with the Yemassees 12 

Repeal of election laws 12 

Nicholas Trott and the judiciary 12 

Revolution of 1719 13 

Appointment of public officials 15 

Power of initiating legislation 20 

Summary 21 

SECTION I 

LAND SYSTEM 

CHAPTER I. Origin and Development of the System During the 
Proprietary Period 

Charters of 1663 and 166.5 25 

Fundamental Constitutions 26 

Commissions and instructions 26 

Disputes between the settlers and the proprietors 28 

Quit rents 28 

Land laws of 1696 29 

Land frauds 31 

Purchase of proprietary interests by the crown (1729) 32 

vii 



viii TABLE OF CONTENTS 

CHAPTER II. Land Frauds 

Baronial grants 34 

Closing of the land office (1719-1731 ) 36 

Opinion in the Johnson case 36 

Quit Rent Act of 1731 37 

Opportunity for fraud 37 

Arguments of Surveyor-General St. John and Attorney-General 

Whitaker against the act 38 

Revenge of the land speculators 41 

Dispute over Judge Wright's salary. An independent judiciary 44 

Success of the speculators 48 

Results of massing land in large tracts 48 

Commissioner McCulloh's attempts to put an end to frauds 48 

Opposition of governor and council 49 

Closing of the land office ( 1773) 52 

New system of granting land ( 1774) 52 

CHAPTER III. Quit Rents 

Collections during the proprietary period 54 

Proprietary claims purchased by crown (1729 ) 55 

Quit Rent Act of 1731 56 

McCulloh's attempts to secure a better rent roll 57 

Proposals of 1741. Presentment of the Charleston grand jury. 58 

Dispute with Secretary Hammerton 60 

Dispute over the election of a public treasurer 61 

Rent Roll Bill of 1744 62 

Judge Whitaker's arguments in favor of it 65 

McCulloh's objections 66 

Probable fate of the bill in England 67 

Summary. Reasons for failure of the crown 69 

SECTION II 

GOVERNMENT 

CHAPTER I. The Executive 

The Governor 73 

Method of appointment 73 

Tenure 74 



TABLE OF CONTENTS ix 

Order of succession 74 

Remuneration. Salary, fees, fines, and forfeitures 74 

Commissions and instructions. The written constitution of the 



province 



78 



Powers 79 

Legislative 79 

Financial 80 

Administrative 81 

Judicial 82 

Ecclesiastical 83 

Military 83 

Diplomatic 84 

Miscellaneous 84 

The Council 85 

Method of appointment 86 

Tenure 86 

Powers. Threefold character 87 

Other Executive Officials 88 

CHAPTER II. The Legislature 

Development during the proprietary period 89 

The Governor 90 

The Council 90 

Powers and privileges 90 

Exclusion of the governor 92 

Confusion of functions 94 

Officials 95 

The Commons House of Assembly 95 

Election Laws 95 

Qualifications of electors 97 

Qualifications of members 98 

Apportionment of representatives 100 

Procedure in elections 101 

Organization of house 101 

Powers and privileges 103 

Method of passing bills 105 

Quorum 107 

Duration of assemblies 108 

Officers. Disputes over election of speaker and clerk 110 



X TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Remuneration 115 

Attempted changes in the election law 115 

CHAPTER III. The Judiciary 

Judicial Powers of the Governor and Council 118 

Court of error 118 

Ordinary court 119 

Court of chancery 119 

Common Law Courts 120 

Origin 120 

Common law adopted into the province ( 1712) 121 

Chief Justice Nicholas Trott 122 

Judiciary Act of 1720 122 

Encroachment on judicial powers of the governor 122 

Act of 1727 125 

Jury Act of 1731 126 

Jury system 126 

Court of general sessions placed on a statutory basis 127 

Prisoners allowed council 127 

Acts of 1732 and 1734. Repealed in England 128 

Act of 1737 130 

Court of common pleas placed on a statutory basis 130 

Whitaker letter of February 3, 1742 131 

Power of courts to pass upon constitutionality of laws. ... 132 

The Circuit Court Act of 1769 133 

Necessity for courts in the back country. The Regulators 133 

Purchase of provost marshal's interests 134 

Act of 1768 134 

Chief provisions 134 

Repealed in England 136 

Tenure of judges 136 

Salary of court officials 136 

Method of appointing sheriffs 136 

Regulators and Scovilites 137 

Act of 1769 138 

Approved by the king 138 

Judges appointed 139 

Building of court houses and gaols 139 

Law put into operation ( 1772) 141 

Two circuits 141 



TABLE OF CONTENTS xi 

Lower Courts 141 

Justices of the peace 141 

Appointment 141 

Powers and duties 142 

Attempt to establish " courts of conscience " ( 1747 ) 142 

Courts for trial of negroes 143 

Coroners 145 

Attempt to establish county and precinct courts ( 1721 ) 145 

The Admiralty Court 147 

Difficulty in enforcing Acts of Trade and Navigation 147 

Admiralty court established ( 1697 ) 148 

Unsuccessful attempt of the British government to centralize 

the colonial admiralty 149 

Court of vice-admiralty for all America ( 1764) 149 

Four courts of vice-admiralty ( 1768 ) 149 

Powers and jurisdiction of the court 150 

Piracy, treason, felony, and murder 150 

Acts of Trade and Navigation 153 

Maritime cases in general 154 

Prize cases 155 

Attempt to establish a court of exchequer 156 

Commission issued (1732) 156 

Assembly refuses to pass jury law 157 

CHAPTER IV. Colonial Agents 

Different kinds of agents 158 

Establishment and early history of the South Carolina agency 

(1704-1749) 159 

Ash and Boone 159 

Kettleby 159 

Boone and Beresford 160 

Yonge and Lloyd. Committee of correspondence. Duties of 

an agent 161 

Wragg 163 

Fury. Method of election 164 

Assembly secures control over the agent. (1749-1775) 164 

James Crokatt appointed 165 

Continued in office against the will of governor and council. . . . 166 

Nature of the victory 168 

James Wright appointed 169 



xii TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Charles Garth. Assembly controls committee of correspondence 1G9 

Advantages of control over agency 170 

CHAPTER V. Militia and Defense 

Militia 171 

Necessity for militia organization 171 

Militia Laws 173 

Officers 173 

Men 175 

Rewards and punishments. Pension system 176 

Miscellaneous provisions 177 

Artillery 177 

Charleston watch 178 

Patrol 179 

Effectiveness of the system as a whole 181 

Number liable to duty 182 

Rangers 182 

Provincial Navy 187 

Independent Companies 192 

Coast Defenses. Charleston fortifications 196 

Frontier Defenses 208 

Port Royal and Fort Moore ( 1716) 208 

Fort King George ( 1721 ) 209 

Pallachocola Old Town ( 1723) 209 

Fort Frederick ( 1731 ) 210 

Fort Prince George ( 1753) 210 

Fort Loudon (1756) 211 

Fort Lyttleton (1758-1762) 211 

Fort Charlotte (1765-1766) 212 

Indian Relations 212 

Provincial control ( 1670-1756) 213 

Early regulations ( 1670-1707) 213 

Plural commissioner system (1707-1716) 214 

Public corporation system ( 1716-1721 ) 214 

Plural commissioner system ( 1721-1723) 215 

Trouble with Virginia traders 216 

Governor and council (1723-1724) 217 

Single commissioner system (1724-1751 ) 217 

Governor, council, and assembly (1751-1752) 218 

Single commissioner system (1752-1756) 218 



TABLE OF CONTENTS xiii 

Dispute with Georgia 218 

Dispute between the governor and assembly 219 

Royal control ( 1756-1776) 222 

Establishment of the two superintendencies (1756) 222 

Extension of powers ( 1764) 224 

Regulation of trade (1764-1768 ) 225 

CHAPTER VI. Financial History 

Introduction 228 

Meaning of Financial History 228 

Fijiancial statics and dynamics 228 

A. Monetary System 229 

Various mediiims of exchange in use 229 

English coins 229 

Produce 229 

Spanish, Mexican, and Peruvian coins. Proclamation money. . 230 

Bills of credit ( 1702-1731 ) 231 

Early issues (1702-1712) 231 

Bank Act (1712) 232 

Subsequent issues of the proprietary and revolutionary 

periods ( 1712-1721 ) 233 

Struggle between council and assembly over the currency 

question (1721-1731 ) 234 

Nicholson's administration ( 1721-1725) 234 

£120,000 act (1722) 236 

Imprisonment of merchant petitioners 236 

Repeal in England 240 

Sinking fund act (1724) 241 

Middleton's administration ( 1725-1730) 241 

Efforts of assembly to 

(a) Evade sinking fund act 243 

(b) Issue new bills 243 

. Johnson's administration (1730-1735 ) 268 

Appointment 268 

Currency problem before the Board of Trade 269 

Solution of problem (1731 ) 271 

Sinking fund law suspended 272 

Public orders issued to pay provincial debts. 272 

Dispute over President Middleton's salary 273 

Bills of credit reissued 273 



xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Attempts to increase currency after 1731 274 

Parliamentary restrictions 275 

Public orders (1731-1770) 275 

Struggle between Governor Glen and the assembly 275 

Table of amounts issued 276 

Purposes of issues 277 

Tax certificates 277 

Assembly issue in 1774 278 

Summary of monetary system 278 

B. Pvevenue System 279 

Financial statics. Sources of revenue 279 

Direct taxes 280 

Procedure in framing tax bills 280 

Analysis of a bill 282 

Apportionment between Charleston and the country 282 

Articles taxed 282 

Method of assessment and collection 282 

Amount raised by direct taxation 284 

Import and export duties 285 

Sketch of tariff legislation 285 

Attempts to encourage ship-building 286 

Specific appropriation of tariff receipts 287 

Amount raised 287 

Tunnage duty. Powder 288 

Fees and licenses 288 

Fines and forfeitures 288 

Quit rents 288 

Total revenues for year 1746 288 

Financial dynamics. Struggle over money bills (1721-1760) .. 289 
Council examines accounts and amends money bills (1721- 

1725) 289 

Dispute over allowance to Boone and Trott 289 

Salary of the council clerk 290 

Renewed dispute over Boone's allowance 290 

Assembly denies right of council to amend (1725-1736) .. 291 

Annual tax bill of 1725 291 

Legislative procedure 291 

Speaker Broughton's interpretation of the gov- 
ernor's thirty-fifth instruction 294 



TABLE OF CONTENTS xv 

Annual tax bill of 1735. Dispute over salary of the 

chief justice 295 

Pinckney resolutions 296 

Assembly denies right of council to examine the accounts 

(1737) 302 

Assembly committee supervises public expenditures (1737) 305 
Three constitutional advances. William Bull's adminis- 
tration (1737-1743) 306 

(a) Governor excluded from the legislative council 
(1739) 306 

(b) Extension of the assembly's control over money 
bills (1739) 306 

Change in legislative procedure 311 

(c) Assembly controls the election of the public treas- 
urer (1743) 312 

Administration of Governor Glen (1743-1756) 314 

General character of his administration 314 

Membership of the council 315 

Dispute over tax bill for 1745 315 

Council amendments disregarded 316 

Assembly refuses to confer with the council on the 

estimates (1747) 317 

Right of council to suggest amendments denied (1748) 318 

Extensive claims of the assembly 319 

The council defines a money bill (1749) 320 

Governor Glen vetoes a tax bill ( 1753 ) 321 

Dispute over the colonial agency (1753-1756) 321 

Resolution of March 21, 1755 322 

Administration of Governor Lyttleton (1756-1760) 325 

Dispute over tax bill for 1756 325 

Assembly wins a victory 325 

Right of council to sit as an upper house denied . . 325 

General character of Lyttleton's administration 327 

Summary 327 

CHAPTER VII. The Downfall of Royal Government (1760-17T6) 

General character of the period before 1760 330 

General character of the period after 1760 330 

Some reasons for the failure of the new imperial system 331 



xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Expulsion of French and Spanish 331 

Sentiment of union. Intercolonial wars 331 

Neglect of the colonial loyalists 331 

Condition of the government in 1760 332 

Legislature 332 

Choice of public officials 332 

Judiciary 333 

Judges dependent on British government after 1735 334 

Executive 334 

Described in letters of Governor Glen to the Duke of 

Bedford 334 

Encroachments of the assembly 335 

Criticism of the council 335 

Example of the governor's weakness 336 

Contrast between the government in 1670 and 1760 336 

First administration of Lieutenant-Governor William Bull, the 

Second ( 1760-1761 ) 337 

Character of Bull 337 

Dispute over the duty bill 338 

The Gadsden election case ( 1762-1764) 340 

Administration of Governor Boone ( 1761-1764) 339 

Boone checks encroachments of the assembly upon the ex- 
ecutive (1762) 340 

Defects in the Gadsden election 341 

Governor refuses to administer the state oaths 342 

Assembly dissolved. New election 342 

Report of the committee on privileges and elections 343 

Legislative deadlock 345 

Departure of Boone (1764) 347 

Final settlement of the dispute 348 

Boone's salary paid after a long delay (1766) 348 

Committee of assembly appointed to administer state 

oaths (1769) 349 

The Stamp Act ( 1765-1766) 349 

Second administration of William Bull (1764-1766) 349 

South Carolina and the Stamp Act Congress (1765) 350 

Unsuccessful effort to enforce the law 351 

Business suspended 352 

Bull raises tlie embargo. Advice of Surveyor-General Randolph 352 
Attempt to open courts of justice 353 



TABLE OF CONTENTS xvii 

Assistant justices appointed 353 

Case of Jordan vs. Law 354 

Clerk Campbell refuses to enter the judgment 354 

Repeal of the Stamp Act 355 

Campbell fined for contempt of court 356 

Chief Justice Skinner suspended (1767) 356 

Assembly refuses to furnish supplies for British troops (1769) .... 358 

Administrations of Montagu and Bull (1766-1769) 358 

Governor Montagu requests aid for troops 358 

Letters of Major Chisolme and General Gage 358 

Assembly refuses the request 359 

Troops not used for frontier defense 359 

Should be supported by parliament 359 

The Townshend Acts (1767) 359 

The Massachusetts circular letter (February 11, 1768) 359 

The Virginia circular letter (May 9, 1768) 360 

Reception of the letters in South Carolina 361 

Speaker Manigault sends replies 361 

Resolutions of approval adopted 363 

Assembly dissolved 364 

New election. Report of committee on grievances 364 

Fourth administration of William Bull (1769-1771) 366 

Parliamentry resolutions of February, 1769. Treason trials. . . 366 

Virginia resolutions of May 16, 1769 367 

Adopted by South Carolina assembly (August 19, 1769) .. 367 

Non-importation agreement 368 

The Wilkes fund controversy 369 

Assembly order and resolution of December 8, 1769 369 

Bull's letter of explanation to home government 370 

Council rejects tax bill (1770) 371 

Report of Attorney-General William de Grey 372 

Sketch of financial history 372 

The additional instruction of April 14, 1770 373 

Assembly resolves not to comply with the instruction 374 

Two theories of the colonial constitution 375 

Attempt to entrap Lieutenant-Governor Bull 377 

Third administration of Governor Montagu (1771-1773) 379 

Legislative deadlock 379 

Dispute with public treasurers. Assembly dissolved 379 

The Beaufort assembly 381 



XVlll 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Montagu's quarrel with the lower house 382 

The thirty-third and last assembly of the royal period (1773- 



1775) 



385 



Growth of the spirit of rebellion (1773-1775) 386 

Attack on the legislative powers of the council (1773) 387 

Sketch of previous attacks 38 < 

Council opposes attempts of assembly to pass laws 388 

Personnel of the council in 1773 389 

Protest of the Draytons 389 

Arrest of printer Powell 390 

Arguments of Speaker Lowndes and Colonel Powell 390 

Assembly supports Lowndes and Powell 391 

Case of Poivell vs. Leigh 392 

Assembly issues certificates to public creditors (1774) 393 

Drayton suspended from the council (1774-1775) 394 

Drayton appointed assistant justice 395 

The Freeman letter 395 

Criticism of judiciary. Dispute with Chief Justice 

Gordon ^^^ 

Scheme of the assembly to evade the additional instruction 397 

Drayton again enters protest on council journals 398 

They request his suspension 398 

Native councilors enter their dissent 399 

Drayton's remonstrance 400 

Questions legislative power of the council 400 

Drayton suspended "^Ol 

Fall of royal government 402 

Administration of Lord William Campbell (1775) 402 

Development of the union sentiment 402 

Intercolonial committees of correspondence (1773-1774) 402 

Virginial resolutions of March 12, 1773 403 

South Carolina committee (July 8) 403 

Other colonies appoint committees 404 

The First Continental Congress ( 1774 ) 405 

Election of delegates 405 

Assembly provides for expenses 406 

Assembly approves action of the congress 406 

The Second Continental Congress (1775-1781 ) 407 

Birth of the American nation 407 



TABLE OF CONTENTS xix 

Appendix 409 

General Assemblies of the Royal Period 409 

Colonial Officials of the Royal Period 410 

Governor 410 

Public Treasurer 411 

Powder Receiver 411 

Secretary of the Province 411 

Commissary General 411 

Provost Marshal 412 

Attorney-General 412 

Surveyor- General of Lands 413 

Receiver-General of the Suit Rents 413 

Chief Justice 413 

Judge of the Court of Vice-Admiralty 414 

Speaker of the Assembly 414 

Colonial Agent 415 

Superintendent of Indian Affairs 416 

List of Authorities 417 

Index 421 



SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 



INTRODUCTION 

The Peopeietaey Period (1670-1719) 

History can best be studied and best be written 
when some central thread of interest exists about which 
all the facts may be grouped and by which they are to 
be interpreted. In colonial history this thread is to 
be found in the continual conflict between two opposing 
tendencies, represented by two clearly defined parties : 
the tendency toward imperial control, represented in 
the provinces by the governor, council, and other crown 
officials; and the tendency toward independence, rep- 
resented by the i^opular branch of the colonial legisla- 
ture. According to the prevalence of the one or the 
other, the colony would sink into a mere dependency 
without popular representation or would develop into a 
commonwealth independent of the mother country. 

These tendencies were at work in all the colonies, 
but the struggle assumed a different foim in the 
two great classes of colonies, the corporate and the 
provincial.^ In the former the popular element was 

1 For the classification of colonial governments, see Osgood, Pol. Sci- 
ence Quarterly, XI, 259-263. Also his articles on the Proprietary 
Province, American Hist. Revietc, II, 644-664; III, 31-55, 244-265. 

1 1 



2 SOUTH CAKOLIKA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

predominant from the outset, and little was needed to 
break off the shadowy dependence and complete the 
transition into a commonwealth. In the provinces, 
however, the prerogative element was strong. The pro- 
prietor, whether the king, a private individual, or a 
proprietary board, was the head of the government and 
lord of the territory. Hence the people were tenants 
as well as subjects and there was a double cause for 
conflict. The corporate colony existed only in New 
England. South Carolina was always a province, pro- 
prietary until 1719, and royal until 1776. Its history is 
the story of an uninterrupted conflict and of the gradual 
triumph of the popular over the prerogative element. 

The plan of this work is as follows: First, a brief 
introductory chapter on the proprietary period with 
special reference to the encroachments of the assembly 
on the rights of the proprietors, culminating in the 
revolution of 1719. Then follows a section on the land 
system, dealing with the proprietors as territorial lords, 
especial attention being devoted to land frauds and the 
controversy over quit rents. Finally, comes a section 
on the government treating of the executive, legislative, 
and judicial departments, of the colonial agency, and 
of the military and financial systems. An attempt 
is made to describe the governmental system as 
established by commissions, instructions, and statutes, 
and to show how it was modified in the direction 
of greater popular control when put into actual 
operation. The period covered is in the main that 
previous to 1760. The concluding chapter begins with 
the accession of George III. to the British throne 



THE PKOPKIETAKY PEKIOD 3 

and ends with the downfall of royal government in 
South Carolina. The struggle between the prerogative 
and popular elements in the colony is discussed in some 
detail. 

In the year 1629, Charles I. granted to his attorney- 
general, Sir Robert Heath, all the territory lying be- 
tween the 31st and 36th parallels of north latitude and 
extending through from sea to sea.^ No settlement was 
made under this patent, and in 1663 the same territory 
was granted to eight of the favorites of Charles II. A 
second charter in 1665 extended the limits to 29° and 
36° 30'.^ The proprietors were to legislate for the 
colony *'by and with the advice, assent, and appro- 
bation of the freemen." They were also empowered 
to grant such dispensations and indulgences to dis- 
senters as in their discretion they should think fit and 
reasonable, and such persons were not to be disturbed 
in religious matters so long as they kept the civil peace. 
This was not a guarantee of religious liberty, but 
merely a permission to the proprietors to grant it or 
not at their own discretion.^ The proprietors were to 
hold by free and common socage and the statute quia 
emptores was set aside, thus allowing subinfeudation. 

The proprietors at first decided to offer very liberal 
terms to induce settlers to go out. By their concessions 
of 1663 and 1665 the freemen were guaranteed religious 
freedom, given a large share in the government, and 

1 N. Car. Col. Records, I, 5-13. 
Uhid., 20-33, 102-114. 

'McCrady in his treatment of the religious controversy in 1704 
calls attention to this fact. S. Car. under Prop. Govt., 410. 



4 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

empowered to create courts of justice.' No permanent 
settlement was made under these articles, and in 1669 
the proprietors changed their policy and adopted a new 
system essentially monarchical in its nature. It would 
be useless to discuss in detail the cumbersome scheme 
outlined in the Fundamental Constitutions, inasmuch 
as it could never be carried out and had little effect 
except upon the land system.^ 

The board of proprietors held a meeting in April, 
1669, and decided to contribute £500 each toward fitting 
out an expedition.^ Three shiploads of colonists set 
sail with orders to go by way of Barbadoes, receive in- 
structions from Sir John Yeamens and Mr. Thomas 
Colleton, and then proceed to Port Royal, where the 
settlement was to be made.* After many adventures 
the settlers reached Port Royal in March, 1670, but 
becoming dissatisfied, moved up the coast and settled 
on the west bank of the Ashley river.^ 

Lands were laid off, fortifications were erected, and 
a government established, in accordance with the in- 
structions to Governor Sayle. There was to be a grand 
council of ten members, one-half deputed by the pro- 
prietors and the other half elected by the freemen. 

1 N. Car. Col. Records, I, 43-46, 75-93. These documents are known 
as the Barbadoes Concessions, their object being to secure settlers from 
Barbadoes. 

2 For the first set, that of July, 1669, see the Shaftesbury Papers, 
8. Car. His. 8oc. Col., V, 93-117; for the second set, March, 1670, N. 
Car. Col. Records, I, 187-206. 

3 Shaftesbury Papers, S. Car. His. 8oc. Col, V, 91-93. 
*Ibid., 123-124, 129. 

5 Ibid., 167, 173, 192-193. 



THE PKOPRIETAEY PEEIOD 5 

This was intended primarily as an executive body. The 
freeholders were also to elect a parliament of twenty 
members, who, with the five deputies of the proprietors, 
were to constitute the legislative body.' Alleging the 
small number of colonists as an excuse, Governor Sayle 
at first refused to call a parliament, and the grand coun- 
cil took upon itself the entire administration of affairs, 
legislative, executive, and judicial. Two popular lead- 
ers, William Owen and William Scrivener, became dis- 
satisfied and tried to foment a disturbance.^ Matters 
were quieted by the arrival in May, 1671, of a second 
set of instructions to the governor, which again re- 
quired him to call a parliament.^ This apparent victory 
was practically nullified by an additional instruction in 
December which provided that all legislative measures 
must originate in the grand council and then be sent 
to the parliament for its simple approval or rejection.* 
The history of the province for the next hundred years 
consists largely of tracing the process by which the 
positions of these two bodies became reversed. By 
1771 the council had become the mere figurehead, and 
the assembly had become supreme. 

It would be impossible, without taking up consider- 
able space, to treat this period in detail; hence we can 
give only a few facts and attempt to show the general 
tendency in the development of the province.^ A few 

1 Shaftesbury Papers, 8. Car. His. Soc. Col, V, 120-121. 
mid., 290-295. 
sibid., 322-323. 
*IUd., 367. 

5 For detailed accounts see Rivers, Sketch of the History of 8. Car. 
and McCrady, 8. Car. under Prop. Govt. 



6 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

words should first be said in regard to the growth of 
the colony and the character of its population. The 
original settlement, made in the spring of 1670, con- 
tained less than two hundred souls.^ Many others soon 
began to arrive, especially from England and the Bar- 
badoes. In 1680 the white population had increased 
to 1200,' and in 1700 to 5500.^ The number of slaves at 
this time is not given, but by 1708 they formed a ma- 
jority of the population. The early settlers were mostly 
pure English, Barbadians, and French Huguenots. 
They settled along the coast north and south of Charles- 
ton and did not penetrate far into the interior. The 
province was soon divided into three coast counties: 
Berkeley, extending from the Stono river to the Sewee, 
and including Charleston; Craven to the north of the 
Sewee ; and Colleton to the south of the Stono. 

In 1680 the settlement was removed from the west 
bank of the Ashley to the site of the present city of 
Charleston on the neck between the Ashley and Cooper 
rivers. From the very beginning Charleston was the 
political and social center of the province. Here re- 
sided the governor, council, and most of the provincial 
officials. Here for a time were held all elections, and 
for a still longer time all courts of justice. In short, 
until within a few years of the Revolution, the will of 
the town was, politically speaking, the will of the 
province. 

1 Shaftesbury Papers in S. Car. His. Soc. Col, V, 156, 1G3. 

2 Carroll, His. Col. of S. Car., II, 82. 

3 Rivers, Sketch of the His. of 8. Car., 443. See McCrady, 8. Car. 
under Prop. Govt., 722, for table of population at different times. 



THE PEOPKIETARY PERIOD 7 

To return to the field of politics, we may roughly 
divide the proprietary period into three sub-periods. 
The first, extending to 1700, was characterized by a 
protracted conflict between the representatives of the 
people in parliament, aided by the elected element in 
the grand council on one side, and the governor and 
deputies of the proprietors on the other. The principal 
questions at issue were the refusal of the people to sub- 
scribe to the numerous editions of the Fundamental 
Constitutions, the attempts of the proprietors to give 
to the new and as yet sparsely settled counties of 
Craven and Colleton a representation in parliament 
equal to that of Berkeley county, and finally a con- 
troversy over the quit rents. The settlement was re- 
duced almost to a state of anarchy, and the proprietors 
were compelled to make concessions. The result was 
a gradual change in the colonial constitution and a 
development in the direction of greater popular control 
over the government. 

It has already been stated that the plan of govern- 
ment as first established gave the grand council the sole 
power to initiate legislation. The proprietors sent out 
an instruction in 1682 providing that the major part 
of the grand juries of the counties might present sug- 
gestions suitable to be passed into laws, and that, if the 
grand council did not propose them in a suitable time, 
they might be considered in parliament without further 
action.^ In 1692 the parliament seems to have been 
finally divided into two houses and the elective element 
disappeared from the council.- The struggle was now 

1 Rivers, Sketch of the His. of 8. Car., document in appendix, 396. 
^ Com. House Journals, Ms., I, 1; Statutes, II, 72, 74. 



8 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

to be one between the popular house of assembly and 
the appointed governor and council. A long and ran- 
corous debate over the power of initiation set in, which 
was finally settled, May 15, 1693, by the following 
message from Governor Smith to the house of assem- 
bly: ''Gentlemen, I thank God I have reason to hope 
that many things which formerly were obstructions to 
the dispatch of Publique affairs in the way of Parlia- 
ments or Assemblys are removed; the Lords Proprie- 
tors having consented that the proposing power for the 
making of Laws which was heretofore lodged in the 
Grand Council only is now given to you. ' '* 

A controversy over the quit rents soon became the 
all-absorbing topic of interest. The colonists were al- 
most on the point of open rebellion when Governor 
John Archdale arrived in 1695 with specially enlarged 
powers to restore harmony. He permitted the passage 
of a liberal quit rent law, the last clause of which de- 
clared it ' * unrepealable and irrevocable by any power 
or persons whatsoever, without the consent of the Gen- 
eral Assembly."^ 

Archdale was succeeded in 1696 by Deputy Governor 
Blake, who governed until 1700. Thanks to the benefi- 
cent settlement of Archdale, these were years of peace. 
With the close of the century, colonial politics entered 
a new phase. Archdale 's law put at least a temporary 
check to the disputes over quit rents and land tenures, 
and the proprietors had given up all attempts to en- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., I, 50. Rivers gives the date of this 
message incorrectly as May 15, 1694, Sketch of the His. of S. Car., 171. 

2 Statutes, II, 96-102. See p. 30. 



THE PEOPEIETARY PERIOD 9 

force the Fundamental Constitutions. The result was 
the dissolution for the time being of the old parties, 
which we may call the proprietary party and the peo- 
ple's party. The four years of Blake's administration 
constituted a period of transition in which new issues 
were coming to the front. Religion was now becoming 
the basis of party division, hence we find churchmen 
and dissenters opposing one another. The wealthy in- 
habitants of Berkeley county, who were for the most 
part churchmen, had ten representatives in the assem- 
bly. The Colleton county dissenters likewise had ten 
members. The French Huguenots of Craven county, 
with their ten members, held the balance of power. 
They were inclined to ally themselves with the church 
party; hence the dissenters attempted to disfranchise 
them on the ground that they were aliens. Blake, who 
was a dissenter, was succeeded in 1700 by James 
Moore, a high churchman. The contest soon became 
bitter. Moore's expedition against St. Augustine was 
made a party question, and its failure may have been 
partly due to the opposition of the dissenters. 

In 1703, Sir Nathaniel Johnson, a bigoted high 
church Jacobite, arrived in the country with a commis- 
sion as governor. Matters soon came to a head. By 
a close vote a test act was passed. May, 1704, requiring 
members of the assembly to conform to the Church of 
England and receive the sacrament according to the 
rites and usages of that church.^ In this may be seen 
the influence of English politics, which were then being 
agitated by the bill to prevent occasional conformity. 

1 statutes, II, 232-235; Com.. House Journals, Ms., II, 241-242, 245, 
267. 



10 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Just as in England, dissenters and moderate church- 
men opposed the measure. Conspicuous among the 
latter class was the Reverend Edward Marston, rector 
of St. Philip's, Charleston. He openly attacked the 
policy of the government from his pulpit, and they re- 
taliated by depriving him of his yearly salaiy.^ The 
victorious party now pushed on, and in November of 
the same year passed an act for the establishment of 
the Church of England in the province.^ After pro- 
viding for the division of Berkeley county into six 
parishes, the erection of churches and the maintenance 
of ministers, the act went on to provide for a lay com- 
mission of twenty members for the trial of ecclesiastical 
cases.^ This was directed against Marston, but it was 
a great blunder for it encroached upon the jurisdiction 
of the Bishop of London. The dissenters sent Mr. 
Joseph Boone to England as special agent to petition 
the proprietors against the bills. The palatine, Lord 
Grranville, was a violent partisan of the act against occa- 
sional conformity, which had recently been defeated 
in parliament for the third time, and he gladly ap- 
proved these colonial statutes. Failing to get relief 
here, Boone appealed to the Whig House of Lords in a 
memorial, which, with great adroitness, laid special 
stress upon the interference with the jurisdiction of the 
Bishop of London.* 

1 Rivers, Sketch of the His. of 8. Car., 220. 

^ The church had not yet been formally established, though the 
Charleston minister had for some time been receiving a salary from 
the government. 

3 Statutes, II, 236-246. 

* Rivers, Sketch of the His. of S. Car., Appendix, 461-463. 



THE PROPKIETARY PERIOD H 

On March 12, 1706, the Lords presented an address 
to Her Majesty asking that South Carolina should be 
relieved of its misfortunes.^ The address was referred 
to the Board of Trade, which reported, on the advice 
of the attorney-general and solicitor-general, that the 
acts were repugnant to the laws of England and not 
warranted by the charter, and that therefore the queen 
should declare them null and void and require the pro- 
prietors to abrogate them. They further suggested 
that the queen might proceed against the charter 
either by writ of scire facias in chancery or by quo 
warranto in the queen's bench, provided the said acts 
had been approved by the proprietary board.^ The 
proprietors saved themselves by showing that only a 
minority of the board had given their approval. 

The colonial assembly passed an act, November 30, 
1706, to repeal all laws in regard to the church and 
at once enacted a new law for the establishment of 
religious worship according to the Church of England, 
which made no reference to a lay commission or to a 
religious test for membership in the assembly.^ This 
act, with some additions and amendments, remained in 
force until the Revolution. It divided the province 
into ten parishes named after those of Barbadoes. In 
1721 the ]3arishes were finally made the election unit 
for members of the lower house of assembly. 

The settlement of the church controversy was fol- 
lowed by a few years of quiet and prosperity, and then 

1 N. Car. Col. Records, I, 635-637. 
'^Public Records, Ms., V, 157-159. 
3 Statutes, II, 281-294. 



12 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

came another attack on the proprietors, which ended 
with the revolution of 1719 and the overthrow of the 
proprietaiy government. The causes that led to this 
revolt were briefly as follows: In the year 1715, the 
Yemassee Indians, instigated by the Spanish at St. 
Augustine, made an attack on the South Carolina settle- 
ments. The little band of colonists struggled with 
great valor, but were soon reduced to a state of despair. 
Agents were sent to England to ask aid of the pro- 
prietors. On their refusal to help, application was 
made directly to the crown. The Board of Trade re- 
ported that they could not assist the province unless 
its government were vested in the crown. The col- 
onists were thus compelled to continue the contest with- 
out assistance from abroad. They begged the king to 
take the province under his own control and protect 
them from their enemies. 

Numerous other grievances gave added strength to 
the spirit of revolt. An act of 1717, making the parish 
the unit of representation in the lower house, was 
promptly vetoed by the proprietors and the old method 
of electing all the representatives at Charleston was 
restored. This was a grievance, not only because of 
the great distance necessary for the electors to travel, 
but because of the opportunity it gave for intimidation 
and manipulation of elections by a small official clique, 
then led by Chief Justice Nicholas Trott and his 
brother-in-law William Rhett. Trott, who was a 
learned lawyer and the occupant of numerous salaried 
positions, kept up a constant correspondence with the 
proprietors and had more influence with them than the 



THE PKOPRIETARY PERIOD 13 

governor had. On his advice, a number of laws dear 
to the people were disallowed by the proprietary board, 
as, for example, an act regulating the Indian trade and 
an act disposing of the captured Yemassee lands. He 
became an object of popular hatred, and thirty-one 
articles of complaint against him were presented to the 
assembly. The most important of these was that he 
held a monopoly of judicial positions, which he did not 
hesitate to use for partisan purposes. He was sole 
judge of the courts of common pleas, of king's bench, 
and of vice-admiralty, and a member of the council, 
hence also of the court of chancery. 

Governor Johnson and the council saw that trouble 
was brewing and sent one of their number, Mr. Francis 
Yonge, to England to urge the proprietors to remove 
Trott from his offices and to make concessions in regard 
to election laws, Indian trade, and other grievances. 
The proprietors refused to heed the advice and sent 
Yonge back with a letter of thanks to Trott for his zeal 
in their behalf and also an order creating a new council 
of twelve, from which those old members who had sided 
with the people were excluded. The popular party ob- 
jected to this council on the ground that there were 
twelve members, whereas there had before this been 
only seven, one deputy for each proprietor.^ 

On December 10, 1719, an assembly met which had 
been elected entirely at Charleston according to the old 
election laws. On meeting, they resolved that the elec- 

1 The governor was the palatine's deputy. At the first settlement 
of the province there were only five proprietary deputies, but the num- 
ber was increased to seven, probably in 1G92 when the popular element 
was eliminated from the council. 



14 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

tion act recently passed by them was still in force in 
spite of the proprietary repeal, and that, as a result, 
they could not legally constitute an assembly. Another 
reason was that the new council which had issued the 
election writs was illegal in that it had twelve members 
instead of the customary seven. They then resolved 
themselves into a convention and proceeded to organize 
the revolt. An attempt was made to induce Governor 
Johnson, who was personally popular, to take upon 
himself the government in the king's name. On his 
refusal. Colonel James Moore was chosen governor to 
serve until the king's will could be known. 

The revolution was accomplished with very little dif- 
ficulty because the rumor of a Spanish invasion had 
made it necessary for the governor to call together the 
provincial militia. The militiamen almost unanimously 
signed an association to stand together in an eifort to 
bring the government under the rule of the king. Sup- 
ported by this armed body the convention was supreme. 
They chose a governor and council, and voted them- 
selves to be an assembly. As such they passed laws 
and ordinances and appointed officials. Moore con- 
tinued to act as governor until May, 1721, when Sir 
Francis Nicholson arrived with a commission from the 
king. The colony remained provisionally under the 
crown until 1729, when, by an act of parliament, the 
rights of the proprietors were bought out and South 
Carolina became a royal province.^ 

1 This account of the revolution is based upon Yonge's narrative in 
Carroll, His. Col. of 8. Car., II, 141-192, and upon a petition from the 
council and assembly to the king, dated February 3, 1720, Puhlic Records, 
Ms., VII, 271-299. 



THE PEOPEIETAKY PEKIOD 15 

During this third period of the proprietary era, we 
find few specific points in which the popular gained 
upon the prerogative element in the government, for 
the reason that the proprietors adopted a position of 
unyielding obstinacy. Concessions were refused and 
revolution was the natural result. The total overthrow 
of proprietary rule was of course a decided triumph, 
and it afforded a valuable precedent when it became 
necessary later for the people to revolt against the king 
himself. There were, however, two important victories 
gained by the commons. In the first place, they se- 
cured the power of appointing all public officials paid 
out of the colonial treasury. The public receiver, or 
treasurer of the province, had, as far back as 1691 and 
probably earlier, been chosen by the co-operation of 
the three branches of the legislature in the form of a 
statute.^ Mr. George Logan had thus been appointed 
by the duty act of 1703,^ which in 1704 was continued 
to May 10, 1707.^ He took the part of the dissenters 
in the church controversy and thus incurred the enmity 
of Governor Johnson. When the time came for elect- 
ing his successor in 1707, the commons house, a ma- 
jority of whose members were now dissenters, determ- 
ined that he should succeed himself. Governor John- 
son refused to approve him and suggested Major Parris 
for the place.^ The commons charged the governor 
with trying to ' ' abridge the House of Commons of their 
just right of ordering all things relating to the disposall 

^Statutes, II, 65; Com. House Journals, Ms., I, 253-254. 

2 Statutes, II, 204. 

3 Hid., 247. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., Ill, 237-239. 



16 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of the Publick Money, ' ' and declared that such matters 
had much better be in the hands of the representatives 
of the people than in those of governors, who were 
often ''needy courtiers come abroad to enrich them- 
selves." They rejected Mr. Parris and insisted upon 
the re-election of Logan.^ A long and bitter dispute 
ensued, in the course of which Johnson suggested that 
they agree upon a third party to fill the office tempo- 
rarily until the Lords Proprietors could be consulted.^ 
The reply was that they could not think of making their 
lordships judges in the matter inasmuch as they were 
interested parties. They were quite willing, however, 
to put the question to a final issue before the queen and 
parliament.^ This sounds like a breach of fidelity to 
the proprietors, but as the representatives of the people 
had so recently been successful in their appeal on the 
religious question, it is natural that they should indulge 
in such threats. Johnson consented to submit the aifair 
to the queen and parliament, and suggested a plan for a 
temporary compromise. He agreed to recognize for 
the time being the sole power of the commons to elect 
the public receiver, provided they would not choose 
Mr. Logan or any other person who had made himself 
personally obnoxious to the government during the re- 
cent troubles.* The house refused to drop Logan and 
the governor was quite as determined not to accept him. 
Finally, on July 2, Logan removed the difficulty by 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., Ill, 240-243. 

2 Ibid., 248. 
»Z6id., 250. 
*Ibid., 250-251. 



THE PROPRIETARY PERIOD 17 

voluntarily withdrawing from the contest.^ On the 
same day, the assembly drew up and passed on its first 
reading "An Act declaring the right of the House of 
Commons for the time being to nominate the Publick 
Receiver." With considerable haste it was passed 
through its three readings in both houses and was rati- 
fied by the governor on the 5th. * The act went further 
than the title indicated and conferred upon the lower 
house the sole power of appointing the public receiver, 
comptroller of the duties, powder receiver, and all other 
officials receiving a fixed salary out of the public treas- 
ury. ^ The house at once elected Captain George Smith 
receiver and the governor sent down a message signify- 
ing his approval. They replied tartly that it made no 
difference to them whether he approved or disapproved 
of their choice.* 

The law was put to a test a few years later in a dis- 
pute over the appointment of a powder receiver. The 
duty of this official was to collect the tunnage rate of 
one-half a pound of gunpowder per tun, or the money 
equivalent, on all vessels coming into the ports, creeks, 
or harbors of the province. The earliest extant law 
for levying this rate, that of January 22, 1687, allows 
the governor to appoint the receiver.^ He seems to 
have had this power up to 1698 when Mr. Thomas 
Howard was named as gunner and receiver in the act 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., Ill, 256. 

2 Statutes, II, 299. Title only. 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 402. 
*Ibid., Ill, 259-260. 
f- Statutes, II, 20-21. 
2 



18 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

itself/ The regular rule from this time until the pass- 
age of the act of 1707 was for the receiver to be thus 
appointed, nominally by the concuiTent action of gov- 
ernor, council and assembly. As early as 1701, how- 
ever, it began to be the custom for the lower house to 
nominate, while the governor and council merely ap- 
proved or disapproved of their choice. This arrange- 
ment was recognized by the governor, as will be seen 
from the following message to the commons: ''We do 
not approve of Mr. John Crosskeys for Powder Ee- 
ceiver, and desire that you nominate more than one for 
our approbation."^ 

Captain Matthew Porter, who had been powder re- 
ceiver for several years, died in November, 1717. Gov- 
ernor Johnson at once appointed Major William Blake- 
way to succeed him and requested the house to confirm 
his choice by an act of assembly:^ In answer to this 
they used the following language; "As we find by 
perusal of the laws of this province, that the person to 
act in that station is to be nominated by and solely in 
the disposal of the House of Commons, we shall speed- 
ily take such measures relating to that affair as are 
conformable to the same." His Excellency replied 
that he and the council had perused the laws and were 
of a different opinion. Accordingly, he desired a com- 
mittee of the two houses to confer on the subject. The 

1 statutes, II, 151. William Smith was mentioned as powder receiver 
in an act of 1695, but the context implies that he had already been apn 
pointed by the governor and had given security for the performance of 
his duties. Ibid., 83. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., I, 407. 
^Ibid., V, 380. 



THE PEOPEIETARY PERIOD 19 

commons expressed the hope that he would allow the 
matter to be settled solely by their house as the law 
directed. Governor Johnson retorted by saying that 
the appointment of a powder receiver was a branch of 
the military power and as such vested solely in the gov- 
ernor, who was His Majesty's captain general. How- 
ever, he and the council were willing that the assembly 
should pass an act electing the gentleman whom he had 
already appointed. If they refused, he would adhere 
to his undoubted right and appoint such person as he 
thought proper. Immediately on receiving this mes- 
sage, the house resolved, 'Hhat Colonel Michael Brew- 
ton be and he is hereby appointed Powder Receiver in 
this Province." They further resolved that the law 
of 1707 gave them the undoubted right to the appoint- 
ment and notified all ship-owners and others to regard 
Brewton as the legal receiver. Johnson sent down a 
message saying that he would consent that the house 
should nominate a powder receiver, but that the powder 
magazine must be in the hands of some one appointed 
directly by himself. Accordingly, he had given Major 
Blakeway a commission as commander of the fortifica- 
tions, and he was to take charge of the magazine and 
give receipts to the powder receiver for such powder 
as he should receive. This meant that Brewton was 
to be collector of the powder duty, and Blakeway the 
custodian of it after collection. The house replied that 
they had no desire to nominate a powder receiver who 
was not to have the keeping of the powder, and that 
they had given orders to Brewton to deliver to the gov- 
ernor whatever powder he might need for the public 



20 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

service. Johnson suggested that if they could give 
such an order, they could as easily reverse it, and thus 
might wrest the government from the hands of the ex- 
ecutive. He was compelled to yield, however, and 
Brewton became receiver with full powers.^ 

Johnson must have submitted the whole matter to the 
proprietors, for they sent out an instrument, dated July 
22, 1718, repealing the much-quoted act of 1707.^ The 
repeal was disregarded and the law declared still in 
force by an act of Februaiy 12, 1720.^ In the enthu- 
siasm over the establishment of the royal government, 
a statute was passed, 1721, again vesting the power of 
electing the treasurer, comptroller, powder receiver, and 
other officials in the general assembly.* Our study of 
the royal period, however, will show that the share of 
the governor and council in the election was merely 
nominal and that they were often compelled to accept 
men who were obnoxious to them. 

The other matter referred to was an extravagant 
claim rather than a definite encroachment, but it is of 
interest in showing the general trend of constitutional 
development. The commons house, November 9, 1717, 
sent the following message to the governor and council : 

"May it please your Honors. 

"This house for the expediting of the public business of 
this Province, has read the bill you sent to us yesterday and 
passed by you the first time with amendments; though we 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., I, 381, 384, 398-399, 402-403, 407-410. 

'^Statutes, II, 299. 

3/6iU, III, 103; Public Records, Ms., VII, 143-144. 

* Statutes, III, 148-149. 



THE PROPRIETAEY PERIOD 21 

cannot but remind your Honor, that it ever was the practice, 
and is the undoubted right of this House, to have all bills 
whatsoever, to begin to be read the first time therein, and 
therefore shall ever hereafter insist upon the same practice 
being continued.'" 

In closing tins chapter on the proprietaiy period, it 
may be well to summarize briefly the relative posi- 
tions of the popular and the prerogative elements of 
the government in 1719. The popular branch of the 
legislature had secured the power of choosing and dis- 
missing the public treasurer, the powder receiver, the 
commissioners of the fortifications, and all oflScers paid 
out of the public treasury. The accounts of these offi- 
cials were regularly examined by committees from their 
house. They had practically the sole power of initi- 
ating legislation. Fees of public officials from gov- 
ernor down were regulated by statute. The control 
over church patronage, usually a perquisite of the gov- 
ernor's, was, by the act of 1706, conferred upon the con- 
forming inhabitants of the various parishes.^ 

1 Cotn. House Journals, Ms., V, 361-362. 
'Statutes, II, 288. 



SECTION I 



LAND SYSTEM 



CHAPTER I 

Origin and Development of the System During 
THE Proprietary Period 

The province must now be studied as a fief, of which 
the king was territorial lord and the settlers were ten- 
ants. Just as in England, land grants took the form 
of a tenement rather than an allod and the ultimate 
ownership of all land was vested in the crown. The 
tenure was by free and common socage after the manor 
of East Greenwich, the chief obligations of which were 
fealty and the payment of a fixed rent.^ To under- 
stand with any degree of clearness the questions arising 
in connection with the relations between landlord and 
tenant it will be necessary to go back into the pro- 
prietary period and study briefly the origin and de- 
velopment of the land system. 

The charters of 1663 and 1665 empowered the pro- 
prietors to grant lands in fee simple or fee tail, for a 
term of years or for life or lives to any persons they 
chose, and the grantees were to hold directly of them 
and not of the king. The statute quia emptor es was 
accordingly declared inoperative.- 

1 Blackstone, Commentaries, Book II, Chap. 6. For a detailed ac- 
count of the province as a fief see Osgood, Amer. Eis. Review, II, 644- 
664. Though the military tenure had only recently been abolished in 
England by the statute 12 Charles II, chapter 4, it was never introduced 
into any of the American colonies. 

2 statutes, I, 27-28, 37-38. 

- 25 



26 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

The next step was for the proprietors to make known 
their terms to the prospective settlers. The Funda- 
mental Constitutions contain a number of sections on 
the land system which show very clearly the feudal and 
aristocratic nature of that instrument. In the first 
place, the whole province was to be divided into coun- 
ties, twelve to be laid out at once. Each county was to 
consist of eight seignories, eight baronies, and twenty- 
four colonies.^ These divisions were to contain twelve 
thousand acres each. The seignories were to belong to 
the proprietors, the baronies to the colonial nobility, 
and the colonies, amounting to three-fifths of the whole, 
to be granted out to actual settlers. In each county 
were to be a landgrave with four baronies and two 
caciques with two baronies each. These were to consti- 
tute the hereditary nobility of the province and to have 
seats in parliament. Tracts of land containing more 
than three thousand and less than twelve thousand 
acres might be erected into manors by patent from the 
palatine's court. Provision was made for a registry 
in every precinct in which were to be enrolled all deeds, 
leases, and other territorial documents. After 1689 
every freeholder was to pay to the proprietors a quit 
rent of a penny per acre or the value thereof.^ 

These provisions were of course very general in their 
nature. Details had to be regulated by instructions 
sent out to the governors from time to time. The com- 
mission to Governor Sayle, dated July 26 and 27, 1669, 
gave him and the major part of his council power to 

1 Six colonies constituted a precinct. 
2 Statutes, I, 43-56. 



DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND SYSTEM 27 

sell, let, and convey lands in Carolina in accordance 
with the annexed instructions and such others as should 
be sent later. These instructions stated that it would 
be impossible to put the Fundamental Constitutions 
into operation at once, and went on to provide certain 
temporary arrangements. One hundred and fifty acres 
of land were to be granted to every freeman coming out 
before March 25, 1670, one hundred and fifty more for 
every able man servant brought with him, one hundred 
for eveiy woman servant or man servant under six- 
teen, and one hundred acres for every man servant 
after he had served his time; to those coming before 
March 25, 1671, one hundred acres and seventy acres 
respectively; before March 25, 1672, seventy and sixty 
respectively. 

Perhaps the most interesting part of these instruc- 
tions is to be found in those sections defining the method 
of procedure in taking out patents. The person apply- 
ing for land first appeared before the governor and 
council and secured from them a warrant to the sur- 
veyor-general. The surveyor-general laid out the land 
according to the proportions mentioned in the instruc- 
tions. Then the warrant, together with the surveyor- 
general's return, was recorded. Next, the applicant 
swore allegiance to the king and fidelity and submis- 
sion to the Lords Proprietors and to the Fundamental 
Constitutions. The governor passed the grant under 
his seal, it was signed by him and by three members of 
the council, and finally recorded in the register's office. 
The form of grant is given in full. It provided that 
the land should be held of the ^proprietors in free and 



28 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

common socage in consideration of an annual rent of 
one penny lawful English money or the value thereof 
per acre, the first payment to be made on September 
29, 1690.^ 

In the relations between the proprietors and their 
tenants there were two main questions at issue. In the 
first place, there were numerous land frauds, due in 
part to the provision for granting land in proportion 
to the number of servants and settlers brought into 
the province, but chiefly to the barony grants. Al- 
though the whole province was deeply and perma- 
nently affected, the immediate parties to this con- 
troversy were the proprietors and a few of their lead- 
ing tenants. The other question was much more gen- 
eral in its nature. Every freeholder in the province 
was a rent payer, and was directly interested in the 
method of collection and in the fixing of penalties for 
non-payment. The strenuous efforts made to secure 
regular payments resulted in a long and bitter con- 
troversy, which could not fail to have its effect on the 
constitutional development of the province. 

The quit rent question was the first to give trouble. 
It will be remembered that, according to the Funda- 
mental Constitutions and the instructions to Governor 
Sayle, the people were not to pay any rent until after 
1689, when they were to pay annually one penny per 
acre or the value thereof. In a form of grant sent over 

1 Shaftesbury Papers, S. Car. His. 8oc. Col., V, 117-123. Tlie in- 
structions provided for two special land officers, a surveyor-general and 
a register of deeds. Florence O'Sullivan, whose name is perpetuated in 
Sullivan's Island, was appointed surveyor-general and Joseph Dalton 
register. Ibid., 130-132, 182. 



DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND SYSTEM 29 

in 1682, the words "or the value thereof" were struck 
out, which meant that rents were to be payable in money 
and not in produce.^ It was further provided in 1683, 
that if a tenant fell six months in arrears with his rent, 
the proprietors could take possession of the land. Set- 
tlers were required to sign an indenture or contract 
containing these provisions.^ The colonists refused to 
sign and much disturbance was caused. In a letter to 
Governor Morton, dated April 26, 1686, the proprie- 
tors stated that these requirements were no more than 
those made in England, that the people could leave 
Carolina if they did not wish to pay rents, and, finally, 
that they intended to dispose of their own property as 
they saw fit.^ 

Matters went on from bad to worse; governor after 
governor found it impossible to serve the proprietors 
and gain the confidence of the people. Parties were 
formed, disputes were carried on in the legislature, 
and the culmination was reached in the overthrow of 
Governor Colleton in 1690. The proprietors were 
now compelled to make concessions to the popular 
party and they secured a larger share in the govern- 
ment.^ Finally, in 1695, the Quaker governor, John 
Archdale, was sent out with special powers to secure a 
harmonious settlement. He perceived that further con- 
cessions would have to be made, and, after consider- 
able wrangling, gave his consent to two laws passed on 

I Public Records, Ms., I, 151-152. 

Ubid., II, 98, 138-140, 145-149. 

3 Ibid., 131-132. 

* See the introductory chapter for further discussion. 



30 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

March 16, 1696. The first was entitled, ''An Act to 
ascertaine the Prices of Land, the forms of convey- 
ances, and the manner of Recovering of Rents for 
Lands, and the Prices of the several Commodities the 
same may be paid in." This provided for two forms 
of deeds: in one case a rent of a penny per acre was 
demanded, in the other this rent was reduced to twelve 
pence per hundred acres in consideration of a small 
lump payment.^ Rents were to be paid in money or 
in indigo, cotton, silk, rice, beef, or pork, the price to 
be fixed by a board of six appraisers, one-half chosen 
by the governor and council and one-half by the pop- 
ular branch of the legislature. In case the rents were 
not paid in due time, the proprietors could make 
reasonable distress upon the goods or chattels of the 
owner, or, failing in this, could bring a personal action 
in the court of pleas. There was no provision for for- 
feiture of lands, except in the case of non-residents. 
Their lands held at the penny per acre rent were to be 
declared forfeited after seven years arrears, and those 
held at the rate of twelve pence per hundred acres 
after twenty-one years. The final clause declared the 
act unrepealable and irrevocable by any power or per- 
son whatever without the consent of the general assem- 
bly.^ The other measure passed at the same time was 
entitled, ''An Act for Remission of part of arrears of 
Rent and to ascertain the payment of the remainder." 

1 In addition to these two there was a third form known as the 
pepper corn rent. The tenant delivered to the Lords Proprietors at 
Charleston on the 29th of September, one ear of Indian corn when de- 
manded. Public Records, Ms., 1, 154-155. 

2 Statutes, II, 96-102. 



DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND SYSTEM 31 

This remitted three years arrears on some lands and 
four years on others, and contained about the same pro- 
vision for the collection of the remaining arrears as 
that mentioned above in the other act.^ 

Quiet was restored by these laws and the colonists 
began to direct their attention to internal politics. The 
land question next came up in connection with fraudu- 
lent and exorbitant grants. The provision for grant- 
ing a certain amount of land for every servant or settler 
brought into the colony was very much abused. Four 
or five different grants were often made for the same 
servant. Large tracts of land near the settlements 
were secured by speculators, and the growth of the 
colony was retarded. The proprietors sent an instruc- 
tion to the governor in December, 1699, directing that 
no more than five hundred acres should thereafter be 
granted to one person without special order from their 
board, and that all future grants should contain a clause 
of forfeiture unless settlement was made within four 
years.^ The abuses continued and the proprietors de- 
termined to use still more stringent efforts to check 
them. Accordingly, in 1710, they wrote to Governor 
Tynte complaining of the many exorbitant and illegal 
grants and providing that, for the future, no land 
should be sold by any agent whatsoever without an 
immediate order from the proprietors. All persons 
who desired land were compelled to apply at the pro- 
prietary board in London.^ This proved a great hard- 

1 statutes, II, 102-104. 

2 Public Records, Ms., IV, 128. 

3 8. Car. His. Sac. Col., J, 158. 



32 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

ship to the people of the province, and complaints and 
petitions were so numerous that the proprietors were 
induced in 1713 to revoke the order and go back to the 
rule of 1699 allowing grants not exceeding five hun- 
dred acres to each individual/ The abuses continued 
and the j^roprietors in 1718 revoked their concession 
and restored the order of 1710.^ 

The proprietors were deprived of their governmental 
rights by the revolution of 1719, but remained terri- 
torial lords of the Carolinas until 1729. In that year 
an act was passed through parliament establishing an 
agreement with seven of their number for the surrender 
of their title and interest in the provinces to the crown. ^ 
The proprietors, in consideration of £17,500 for their 
rights and £5000 for arrears of quit rents, agreed to 
give over to the crown a seven-eighths undivided share 
of their "royalties, franchises, lands, tenements, and 
hereditaments, and premises" in Carolina, with cer- 
tain exceptions, among which were included all tracts 
of land granted by the Lords Proprietors at any time 
before January 1, 1727. This left a loop-hole for much 
fraud, since the proprietors had been very lavish with 
their grants in the years following the revolution of 
1719. 

1 Public Records, Ms., VI, 56. 

2 Ibid., VII, 159-160. 

' Statutes at Large, 2 George II, chap. 34. Lord Carteret refused to 
sell his interests and continued to hold a one-eighth undivided share 
in the territory of North Carolina and South Carolina until 1744, when 
he gave up all claims to the remaining parts of the province in return 
for a large strip of land in North Carolina bordering on Virginia. 
N. Car. Col. Records, IV, 655-6G3. 



DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND SYSTEM 33 

An opinion on this act, issued February 11, 1737, by 
the attorney-general and the solicitor-general, Ryder 
and Strange, rendered fraud still more easy. They 
decided that land grants made in Carolina after the 
land office was closed in 1719 were valid, provided the 
Lords Proprietors had been made privy to the grants, 
or, after they were made, received consideration for 
them; also that persons holding lands under proprie- 
tary grants made before 1727, on which surveys had 
actually been made, and having more than they were 
entitled to, might, by the act of 2 George II, chap. 34, 
still retain the same and their lands be not subject to 
a re- survey.^ 

An attempt has been made in this chapter to give a 
brief sketch of the land system from the first settlement 
of the province in 1670 until its purchase by the crown 
in 1729, and to trace the progress of the controversy 
over the two leading territorial questions, land frauds 
and quit rents. The following chapters will continue 
the discussion of these questions during the royal period 
and endeavor to show how they influenced the constitu- 
tional development of the province. 

1 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 171-175. 



CHAPTER II 

Land Frauds 

Attention has already been called to some of the 
various methods by which land was fraudulently ap- 
propriated. Though considerable abuse was made of 
the per capita grants for servants, the chief source of 
fraud was, by all means, the provision in the Funda- 
mental Constitutions for baronial grants. It will be 
remembered that in each county there were to be one 
landgrave with four baronies and two caciques with 
two baronies each, and that a barony contained twelve 
thousand acres of land. The proprietors availed them- 
selves of their privilege of recommending persons to 
the board for titles of nobility. The following list of 
those appointed up to 1686 is to be found among the 
public records: 

Landgraves. 

John Locke, April 4, 1671. 

Sir John Yeamans, April 5, 1671. 

James Carteret, October 10, 1670. 
James Colleton, 

Edmund Andros, April 23, 1672. 

Joseph West, April 24, 1674. 

Thomas Colleton, May 28, 1681. 

Joseph Morton, July 18, 1681. 

David Axtell, August 10, 1681. 

34 



LAND FRAUDS 35 

Sir Richard Kirle, June 9, 1684. 

John Price, April 30, 1686. 
Caciques. 

Capt. Wilkinson, July 17, 1681. 
Major Thomas Kowe, February 24, 1682. 

Mr. John Gibbes, October 9, 1682. 

Mr. Thomas Amy, October 12, 1682. 

Mr. John Smith, October 12, 1682. 

Mr. John Monke, February 24, 1683.^ 

It will readily be seen that forty-eight thousand acres 
to each person in the first list and twenty-four thousand 
to each in the second would take up a large part of the 
land of the province. Moreover there were many other 
patents of nobility issued before the fall of the pro- 
prietary government. It is not to be supposed, how- 
ever, that all this land was actually surveyed and laid 
out for the patentees. Their grants were as a rule of 
a general character, merely calling for twenty-four 
thousand or forty-eight thousand acres of land in the 
province of Carolina, with the proviso that each barony 
should contain twelve thousand acres in one tract. The 
grantees made no haste to select their land and in many 
cases died without having taken any steps in the matter. 
Some of them disposed of their claims. For example, 
John Price, created a landgrave in 1686, sold his title 
with the four baronies attached to Thomas Lowndes. 
The result was that by 1719 nearly all of these indefinite 
warrants for land had passed to the heirs and assigns 
of the original ijatentees. Owing to the disturbed con- 

1 Public Records, Ms., I, 12-13. See McCrady, 8. Car. under Prop. 
Govt., 716-719. 



36 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

dition attendant on the revolution, the proprietors closed 
the land office in South Carolina at that time and it 
remained closed until 1731.^ In the meantime the col- 
ony had been growing rapidly, and the soil, especially 
near the coast, had very much increased in value. The 
holders of the old patents now began to seize all the 
more desirable land. Would-be settlers were at a dis- 
advantage because they had no ancient patents and 
could not secure grants while the land office was closed. 
It was afterwards estimated that, between the years 
1719 and 1731, about eight hundred thousand acres of 
the most valuable land in the province were thus taken 
up under color of patents to landgraves and caciques.^ 

In March, 1730, the Board of Trade, desiring to test 
the validity of these grants, sent one to the king's 
attorney-general and solicitor-general, Yorke and Tal- 
bot, for their opinion in point of law.^ The particular 
grant selected was one for twenty-four thousand acres, 
made out to Sir Nathaniel Johnson in 1686, but not yet 
put into execution. An opinion was delivered in July 
to the effect that this and all similar grants were illegal, 
because they failed to designate the exact location of the 
land conveyed.^ On November 24, 1735, a similar 
opinion was delivered in the case of William Hodgson, 
whose patent was dated 1715.^ 

Robert Johnson arrived in the province, December, 
1730, with a commission as governor. Reference has 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXI, 339, 344. 

^Ibid., XV, 149-150. 

' Ibid., XIV, 69-70. 

* Ibid., 246-247. Published in Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 175-176. 

5 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 178. 



LAND FKAUDS 37 

already been made to the purchase by the crown of the 
property rights of seven of the proprietors in 1729. 
Johnson was instructed to reopen the land office and to 
consent to a law for remitting the quit rents, which were 
very much in arrears. In return for this concession, 
the people were required to repeal Archdale's land law 
of 1696 and provide for the future payment of quit 
rents in proclamation money. Another article in his 
instructions called attention to the lavish grants made 
by the Lords Proprietors and recommended the passage 
of a law compelling all grantees to at once settle and 
cultivate their lands. The governor was warned not 
to grant more than fifty acres to a man for each member 
of his household, including servants and slaves.^ 

A bill for the remission of arrears of quit rents, for 
the registering of patents, grants, and title deeds, for 
the repeal of the statute of 1696, and for various other 
purposes mentioned therein was passed August 20, 
1731. It provided that patents or grants, except those 
for town lots, should be registered in the auditor-gen- 
eral's office within eighteen months on penalty of for- 
feiture. The most important section of the law, per- 
haps, was that which guaranteed the validity of all 
grants made by the Lords Proprietors, notwithstanding 
any defects in describing the land, provided some part 
of it had actually been surveyed by a sworn surveyor. 
The term sworn surveyor was held to include the sur- 
veyor-general appointed by the proprietors, together 
with his deputies. Practically all the grants made to 
landgraves and caciques were thus confirmed, for, as 

» Public Records, Ms., XIV, 156-157, 172-173. 



38 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

already stated, a large part of the best land in the prov- 
ince was surveyed during the years 1720 to 1730 inclu- 
sive. But, as if this were not sufficient license for 
fraud, it was further provided that titles would be 
complete, if surveys were made at any time within two 
years after the arrival of a surveyor-general in the 
province.^ The bill was sent to England for the ap- 
probation of the king, and there met with considerable 
opposition. 

In 1731, Mr. James St. John came over with a com- 
mission from His Majesty as surveyor-general of lands.^ 
Filled with a zeal to maintain the rights of the crown 
as well as the rights of the subject, he began at once to 
oppose the schemes of the land speculators. He was 
ably seconded in his efforts by Benjamin Whitaker, 
then deputy surveyor-general, and by several other 
leading men of the province. 

In a long communication to the Board of Trade, re- 
ceived in September, 1732, St. John gave a history of 
the troubles in South Carolina and his reasons for ob- 
jecting to the quit rent act. He first called attention 
to the numerous indefinite grants made before the year 
1700 and to the opinion in the Sir Nathaniel Johnson 
case which declared them all void. In spite of this 
opinion, he said, the quit rent act had guaranteed the 
validity of such patents. A confirmation of the act 
would result in several inconveniences. The first ob- 
jection, in regard to the quit rents, will be treated in 
the next chapter. The second was that the grants for 

» statutes, III, 280-304. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XV, 41-42. 



LAND FRAUDS 39 

the lands thus taken up had never been returned nor 
recorded in any public office, whereby the king could 
know exactly what land each patentee held, and it had 
been possible for the grantees to take up an indefinite 
amount under color of their patents. Some had taken 
timbered land, and, after using all the timber, had left 
it and seized other tracts. In the third place, the 
patentees and speculators had acquired all the best land 
on navigable rivers, and newcomers were obliged to 
take less desirable lands or purchase from them at an 
exorbitant price. Many settlers, he declared, had ac- 
tually left the province on this account.' 

Enclosed with St. John's letter was a report on the 
quit rent act made by Mr. Whitaker while he was at- 
torney-general of the province. Whitaker, who was a 
man of considerable legal training, proceeded to show 
that the landgrave and cacique patents were void, not 
only because they were indefinite as to time and place, 
as set forth in the Johnson case, but also because, for 
the most part, the original grantees had died before 
ever their lands were surveyed. According to the prin- 
ciples of the feudal law their heirs could not inherit, 
since they had died without being seized of any of the 
land. He questioned the opinion in the case of Rusco 
versus French, which had just been delivered in the 
chancery court at Charleston. The opinion was that a 
landgrave patent of 1698, indefinite as to time and place 
and under which no lands were ever taken possession 
of during the lifetime of the original grantee, was never- 
theless valid and the titles of the present holders good 

1 Public Records, Ms., XV, 149-159. 



40 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

in law.^ Whitaker also pointed oyt. the fallacy of the 
argument that these grants must be* confirmed in order 
to protect innocent purchasers by showing that the 
poorer settlers would be benefited by throwing open 
such vast tracts for settlement.' 

In another document sent over at the same time, St. 
John made other observations. He cited the clause in 
the quit rent act which required all grants and land 
titles to be registered within eighteen months and 
stated that there was then a bill before the assembly 
to extend the time, allowing it to be done at any time 
within eighteen months after the quit rent act had been 
approved by the king. Thus, said he, they were threat- 
ening to deprive the king of his rents unless he would 
consent to an act guaranteeing exorbitant land grants. 
Furthermore, the council had recently passed a resolu- 
tion ''that all surveys made of His Majesty's lands in 
this province without a warrant from His Excellency 
the Governor and a deputation from James St. John, 
Esq., His Majesty's Surveyor-General, be void reserv- 
ing such as may be valid by the act made in this 
province for the Kemission of the Arrears of Quit 
Eents passed 20th of August. ' ' By this reservation the 
old patentees regarded themselves as absolved from the 
necessity of securing a warrant from the governor and 
a deputation from the surveyor-general, and had taken 
up lands in whatever manner and quantity they 
thought fit and without any regularity, since no sur- 
veys were required to be returned to the office of the 

1 See Blackstone, Commentaries, Book II, Chaps. XIV and XX. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XV, 170-185. 



LAND FEAUDS 41 

surveyor-general. Another abuse had grown out of the 
clause in the governor's instructions which allowed 
fifty acres of land to be granted for each servant. The 
object of this had been to attract new settlers and, at 
the same time, to prevent them from securing more 
land than they could cultivate. It had, however, been 
taken advantage of by old settlers, who were already 
land-poor, and some six hundred thousand acres had 
thus been appropriated. The result of it all was that 
there were not as many as one thousand acres within 
one hundred miles of Charleston or within twenty miles 
of a river or navigable creek, which were not already 
taken possession of.^ 

Governor Johnson and many of the members of the 
council and assembly were, according to St. John and 
Whitaker, among the largest holders of these old 
patents and hence were especially anxious to have the 
quit rent act ratified in England. Hearing that it was 
about to be disallowed because of St. John 's objections,^ 
they proceeded to annoy him in every way they could. 
First, they accused him of taking exorbitant fees for 
his services and passed an act fixing the fee for survey- 
ing at four pence currency per acre and requiring an 
equal division of this with the deputy.^ Previous sur- 
veyors-general had always regulated this matter by 
private contract with their deputies. Secondly, Gov- 
ernor Johnson had been instructed to lay out eleven 
townships in the province for the benefit of new set- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XV, 160-169. 

2 Ibid., 230; 8. Car. Gazette, October 7, 1732. 

3 Statutes, III, 343-347. 



42 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

tlers.^ St. John was authorized to do the surveying 
at the rate of one penny per acre, but he had barely 
begun when he was interrupted by a resolution of the 
assembly to postpone work. The reasons alleged for 
their action were that it was uncertain when a sufficient 
number of people would arrive to settle the townships, 
that the surveyor-general's demand of one penny per 
acre was exorbitant, and, finally, that if the survey were 
made now, the marks would be so perishable that it 
would have to be done again within three years. St. 
John, in a report to the Board of Trade, answered these 
arguments and stated that they should have asked him 
whether he would do the work for less. Instead of that, 
the governor and council went ahead and employed 
some members of the council to do the surveying, and 
thus deprived him of the rightful profits of his office. 
Furthermore, said he, the fee bill required him always 
to survey land when called upon and forbade his charg- 
ing any more than the legal rate, under penalty of a 
fine of two hundred pounds proclamation money for 
each oifense. This was designed purely to annoy him, 
for, if he were sent for to survey fifty acres of land 
one hundred miles from Charleston, he would receive 
only a few shillings, while his expenses would be many 
times as great.'' 

The wrath of the land speculators was not restricted 
to St. John and Wliitaker, but fell upon all who opposed 
their schemes. Early in 1733, one William Trewin 
came to South Carolina with letters of recommendation 

i Public Records, Ms., XIV, 174-175. 
2 Ibid., lGO-169, 201-203. 



LAND FRAUDS 43 

from the Lords of Trade and the Duke of Newcastle. 
Being treated very coldly by Governor Johnson, he 
allied himself with the St. John-Whitaker faction. In 
a letter to the Board of Trade, under date of May 12, 
1733, he stated their side of the question.^ To begin 
with, he said that the governor and a few other men 
had acquired large tracts of land under color of the 
old patents from the Lords Proprietors. The people 
on the frontiers about Port Royal had been driven from 
their homes by the Indians, and on returning, found all 
their lands in the possession of the speculators, A 
number of men, among whom was a certain Dr. Thomas 
Cooper, determined to survey some land on these tracts 
in order to get a case in court and test the validity of 
the titles. The speculators, instead of submitting their 
titles to a judicial decision, applied to the commons 
house of assembly, who ordered Cooper into the custody 
of their messenger and kept him prisoner for five 
weeks. Soon after his apprehension. Cooper applied 
to two justices of the peace for a writ of habeas corpus. 
It was granted and delivered to the messenger, but he 
refused to obey the writ, and the house indemnified 
him. A second writ was issued by Mr. Middleton of 
the council and a Mr. Somerville, and a third by Robert 
Wright, the chief justice, both of which were likewise 
unheeded. He then petitioned the governor and council 
and also the governor separately to issue writs. These 
petitions were not only disregarded, but two merchants 
who waited on the governor with the petition to him 

» Public Records, Ms., XVI, 112-119. The following account is taken 
largely from this letter. 



44 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

were taken into custody. They secured their release 
only after they had paid heavy fees and asked pardon 
for their conduct/ Several merchants and lawyers 
were likewise committed to prison by the lower house 
for carrying petitions to members of the house who 
were justices of the peace, and all were required to 
pay extortionate fees before securing their discharge. 
Dr. Cooper finally regained his liberty after an impris- 
onment of several weeks. In the meantime the people 
of Port Royal had chosen him to be one of their repre- 
sentatives in the assembly. 

The commons house became enraged at the chief 
justice for issuing writs to their messenger, presented 
accusations against him before the council, and had 
the charges published. The main charge was that he 
had violated the privileges of the house in issuing writs 
to their messenger. An act was passed, May 4, 1733, 
entitled, *'An Act for the prevention of suits and dis- 
turbances to His Majesty's Judges and Magistrates in 
this province, on account of the Habeas Corpus Act." 
This provided that no public officer should be liable to 
any suit or penalty for refusing to issue or to obey a 
writ of habeas corpus petitioned for by any one com- 
mitted to prison by either house of the legislature for 
violation of its privileges.' This was of course to in- 
demnify the messenger for his conduct. Chief Justice 

1 There was no public prison in the province at this time. The provost 
marshal took cliarge of ordinary prisoners and kept them at his own 
house or in some other place prepared by himself. The messenger of 
the assembly took charge of persons committed for contempt of the 
house. In either case they received fees for their trouble and expense. 

li Statutes, III, 347-348. 



LAND FKAUDS 45 

Wright very ably opposed the act in the council and, 
in the defence of the habeas corpus act, declared it to 
be ^'the strongest barrier that the wisdom of our an- 
cestors could devise to preserve the liberties of the sub- 
ject and secure the people from arbitrary violence and 
oppression."^ Mr. Francis Yonge, another member 
of the council, made a long speech in reply in which he 
attempted to show by the practice of the House of 
Commons in England that the commons house had a 
right to arrest for contempt and that a writ of habeas 
corpus was not an effective remedy. He cited the case 
of Manivaring vs. Sacheverel and various others to sus- 
tain his point. ^ The council published a resolution to 
the effect that the lower house possessed all the rights 
and privileges of the English House of Commons and 
that Yonge 's speech rather than Wright's represented 
the sense of their body.^ The lower house now attacked 
the chief justice in the most effective way possible 
to them. On May 30 they resolved that they would 
make no provision for his salary in the estimates for 
the current year.^ Wright, however, continued his 
opposition to the bill after it was sent to England and it 
was largely through his representations that it was 
finally disallowed.^ Governor Johnson and the council 
were quite as angry with the chief justice as were the 
members of the lower house. But they were wise 

1 Public Records, Ms., XVI, 186-188. 
2-8. Car. Gazette, No. 66, April 21, 1733. 
Ubid., No. 67, April 28, 1733. 

* Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 1085-1086; S. Car. Gazette, 
No. 72, June 2, 1733. 

i Statutes, III, 348; Public Records, Ms., XVI, 203-212, 248-257. 



46 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

enough to see that it was not good policy to recognize 
the right of the assembly to withhold public salaries. 
They saw it all the plainer because at that very time 
President Middleton of the council was trying to re- 
cover the salary due him for the period he had served 
as acting governor. Middleton had aroused the wrath 
of the commons by opposing their paper money 
schemes. The members of the council sympathized 
with his financial views. Governor Johnson realized, 
too, that his own influence in the government depended 
largely upon the issue of the Middleton case. The dis- 
pute dragged on for several years. Middleton received 
a part of the amount due him, but the assembly obsti- 
nately refused to pay the remainder.^ Neither would 
they make any provision for the chief justice until after 
a special order from the crown had been received. 
Even then there was some delay and he was finally 
compelled to satisfy himself with one-third the amount 
due him. A warrant from the crown, received in 1735, 
provided that in the future his salary should be paid 
from the quit rent fund. In this way the judiciary be- 
came independent, or rather it became dependent upon 
the crown instead of upon the commons house of as- 
sembly.^ 

1 Nicholson received £3000 currency per annum. In his absence 
this amount should have been divided equally between him and Middle- 
ton. For the three and a half yeans in dispute Middleton should have 
received £5250. Instead he was paid only £.3000. Half of this, accord- 
ing to his statement, he had to give to the governor. 

2 Public Records, Extra, Ms., II, 13S-141, 151, 206; Com. House 
Journals, Ms., IX, 58-59, 133, 219-220, 535-536, 651-656, 707, X, 8, 11; 
Public Records, Ms., XVII, 257-259, 319-321; Statutes, III, 438-448. 
See pp. 295-302. 



LAND FEAUDS 47 

Meanwhile the quit rent act was being considered in 
England. The Board of Trade referred it to the 
Treasury Board as a measure affecting the revenues. 
After considering the arguments of St. John, Whitaker, 
and the attorney-general and solicitor-general against 
the bill, and those of Governor Johnson, and Fury, the 
colonial agent, in its favor, the Treasury Board re- 
ported, October 6, 1732, that the measure was unfit for 
His Majesty's approbation. The Lords of Trade then 
drew up an address to the King telling him of the 
opinion of the Treasury Board and of their own con- 
currence in the same, and begging him to disallow the 
act.' 

As soon as news of this was received in the province 
there was a clamor for revenge upon those who had 
been instrumental in securing the adverse report. St. 
John was arrested on some frivolous pretense and 
kept in prison until his release was ordered by the 
Board of Trade.^ The governor tried to defeat 
Whitaker in his candidacy for the assembly from Port 
Eoyal and injured him in his property rights by stop- 
ping a land grant which Whitaker alleges was regular 
in every way.^ James Graeme, Job Eothmaller, and 
William Trewin were elected to the assembly from Port 
Royal, but the house refused to seat them. Various 
pretexts were advanced. For example, Trewin was 
rejected on the ground that his Christian name was not 
mentioned in the writ, and, as the assembly naively ex- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XV, 239-246. 

2 Ibid., XVI, 137-139, 145-146, XXII, 443. 
^Ibid., XXII, 445-447. 



48 SOUTH CAROLmA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

pressed it, ''it was wholly uncertain what Trewin is 
meant by the said return."^ The real reason, of 
course, in every case was that these men had opposed 
the schemes of the land speculators. 

Strange to say, the king did not repeal the law, in 
spite of the adverse reports of the administrative 
boards, for as late as 1744 mention is made of it as still 
in force.^ A careful search of the records has failed to 
disclose any further reference to it after that date. The 
land speculators thus scored a victory. 

This massing of land in great tracts had some im- 
portant results : its immediate effect was to retard very 
much the growth of the colony; of vastly more impor- 
tance, however, was its influence in building up that 
wealthy slave-holding aristocracy, which was for so 
long a time the conspicuous feature of South Carolina 
life. 

Seeing that he was not properly supported by the 
authorities at home, Mr. St. John relaxed his efforts. 
Nothing further was done to check the abuses until 
1739, when Henry McCulloh was appointed "Commis- 
sioner for Supervising, Inspecting, and Controlling His 
Majesty's Eevenues and Grants of Lands," with in- 
structions to go to North Carolina and South Carolina, 
and carefully look into the abuses there.^ The special 
abuses were the granting of township lands to those who 
had no intention of settling upon them* and the grant- 
ing of large tracts of other land in direct violation of 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., II., 5-6, 10, 14, 27-28, 59-63. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXI, 348. 

3 Ibid., XX, 143-144, 445. 

*8. Car. Gazette, No. 165, March 27, 1737. 



LAND FRAUDS 49 

the royal order to preserve the proportion of fifty acres 
for each member of a man 's household. ^ The fifteenth 
and sixteenth articles of his instructions prescribed in 
detail the method to be observed in the future for the 
granting of lands. The applicant had first to prove his 
rights before the governor and council when at least 
four members of the council were present who had no 
concern or interest in the land petitioned for. If the 
petition was granted, a warrant was drawn up and 
signed by the governor and council and made returnable 
by the surveyor within twelve months from the date of 
issue. The land desired was to be particularly de- 
scribed in the warrant and a docket of it was entered 
in the auditor's office. On the return of the warrant, 
the grant was made out containing the temis and condi- 
tions on which the warrant was issued and the lands 
surveyed. The grant was then to be registered in the 
secretary's office and a docket thereof in the auditor's 
office within six months. Copies of all these entries 
were to be sent to England within twelve months, either 
to the Treasury Board or to the Board of Trade." This 
careful check and balance system, if carried out, would 
have rendered fraud almost impossible. 

On arriving in the province, if his own account may 
be trusted, McCulloh met with opposition from the 
council and the crown officers, while the commons house 
showed a disposition to do their duty in framing a rent 
roll bill and settling the other disorders of the province. 
They were even then, said he, inquiring into the griev- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XX, 126-128, 148. 
Ubid., 148-149. 
4 



50 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

ances of the settlers in Williamsburg township, who 
had been defrauded of their lands by some members of 
the council and other prominent men obtaining town- 
ship grants from Governor Johnson and Lieutenant- 
Governor Broughton in direct violation of the royal 
instructions? 

Furthermore, after the Stono insurrection in 1739,^ 
the commons house passed an act obliging all large 
land owners to furnish a certain number of white men 
for militia duty in proportion to the amount of land 
which they possessed. This was sent to the council and 
disregarded by them, notwithstanding repeated requests 
of the house that they either pass it or state their ob- 
jections. McCulloh gives as the reason for this conduct 
the fact that the members of the council did not wish 
an examination made into the amount of lands which 
they held, nor did they wish to be put to the expense of 
settling them.^ 

McCulloh 's attempt to carry into effect the method 
of passing land grants prescribed in his fifteenth and 
sixteenth instructions likewise failed. He gave a copy 
of the instructions to James St. John, who was still 
surveyor-general of the lands, and asked him to abide 
by them. On April 2, 1741, a warrant was issued by 
the secretary, in pursuance of an order of the governor 
in council, and offered to St. John to make out his 
precept thereon. He refused to comply and went to 

1 Public Records, Ms., XX, 420-421. 

2 For an account of this see McCrady, S. Car. under Royal Govt., 
185-186. 

3Com. House Journals, Ms., XII, 126-127, 155-156, 329; Council 
Journals, Ms., VII, 320; Public Records, Ms., XX, 421-425. 



LAND FEAUDS 51 

McCulloli for advice. McCulloh told him to go to the 
governor and council, and lay before them a copy of the 
instructions he had received. If the governor still per- 
sisted in ordering him to make out the precept, he was 
to do so. McCulloh stated as his reason for giving this 
advice the fact that there was a law of the province 
which required the surveyor-general, under a severe 
penalty, to obey all orders of the governor and council. 
St. John did as he was directed, and the governor re- 
newed his order to issue the precept. The council then 
drew up resolutions censuring McCulloh for his con- 
duct.^ 

The opposition proving too strong, McCulloh soon 
gave up the straggle and went to North Carolina, where 
he seems to have acquired a large amount of land for 
himself.^ He was a prolific writer and the public rec- 
ords of this period are filled with his complaints and 
suggested remedies. One of the latter was that he 
should be given the power to stop the salaries of all 
disobedient crown officials;^ another, that a court of 
exchequer should be established for the trial of such 
officials.^ 

During the remainder of the colonial period there was 
little systematic effort made to check fraudulent land 
grants, but there was less opportunity for fraud, since 
the best lands of the province had already passed out 
of the hands of the crown. The instructions to the dif- 

' Public Records, Ms., XX, 42G-429. 
2 iV. Car. Col. Records, V, C21-G22. 
s Public Records, Ms., XX, 440. 
*lbid., XXI, 126. 



52 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

ferent governors always warned them to guard against 
fraud and extravagance. 

On April 7, 1773, owing to the excited condition of 
the colony, the king in council ordered the closing of 
the land office in South Carolina.^ As soon as news of 
this was received in Charleston, Lieutenant-Governor 
Bull notified the officials of this office and published 
notices in the Gazette. On June 14, he wrote to the 
Earl of Dartmouth, secretary of state for the colonies, 
telling him that the order had caused much suffering, 
since there were one hundred and twenty-six grants 
waiting to be signed by the governor on the next day, 
seven hundred and three plats of survey in the survey- 
or's office awaiting the issue of grants, and one thou- 
sand eight hundred and seventy-six warrants then in 
the hands of deputy surveyors who were actually sur- 
veying the lands.2 The king sent over an order early 
in 1774 for the completion of these grants.^ 

A new system of granting out the remainder of the 
crown lands was adopted by the home government and 
instructions were sent out to the governor in February, 
1774. The governor, lieutenant-governor, surveyor- 
general of lands for the southern district of North 
America, the secretary, the surveyor-general of lands 
in the province, and the receiver-general of the quit 
rents, or any three of them, were to see that all the 
land in the province fit for settlement and not yet 
granted was at once surveyed and divided into lots of 

iPtihlic Records, Ms., XXXIII, 272. 

2/6iU, 272-274. 

3 Ibid., XXXIV, 41^2. 



LAND FEAUDS 53 

not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand 
acres, the size to be determined by the surveyor-general 
according to the nature and situation thereof. After 
due notice had been given, these lots were to be put up 
for sale to the highest bidder, a minimum price for each 
tract to be fixed by the governor, council, and board 
mentioned above, and a quit rent of one-half penny 
sterling per acre reserved on all of it. On paying the 
receiver or his deputy the purchaser would receive a 
bill of sale to be taken to the governor and exchanged 
for a grant in fee simple. Full reports were to be made 
regularly to one of His Majesty's principal secretaries 
of state.^ The outbreak of hostilities probably pre- 
vented the carrying out of this scheme. 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 23-28. 



CHAPTER III 

Quit Rents 

An account has already been given of the quit rent 
controversy up to the passage of Archdale's law in 
1696.^ For several years there was no trouble in re- 
gard to the matter. The rents seem to have been paid 
with a fair degree of regularity until about 1709. 
From then until 1719, collection was more difficult and 
from 1719 to 1731 impossible. The proprietors made 
numerous complaints of the difficulty of collection, and 
in March, 1719, the general assembly passed a statute 
to render the work easier. This act required all land 
owners to show to the receiver-general of the quit rents 
their grants and the terms on which they held, on pen- 
alty of £20 current money. They were also to show 
their last rent receipts or state on oath the time of their 
last payment, and arrears were made recoverable by 
action for debt in the court of common pleas. Rents 
were to be paid in proclamation money or else in rice, 
pitch, or tar at certain prices fixed in the act. After 
thus dutifully providing for the collection of the rents, 
the people's representatives went on to dispose of the 
proceeds. The ninth section of the act stated that the 
Lords Proprietors had, on November 3, 1716, sent out 
instructions authorizing the use for public purposes 

1 See Chapter I of this section. 

54 



QUIT RENTS 55 

of all rent due up to May, 1718, certain specified sums 
being first deducted; that they had since revoked this 
gift, but, as the people were now providing for the col- 
lection of the rents, they hoped that the disputes would 
cease, and enacted that rents up to the end of 1723, after 
deducting certain salaries, should be used to build a 
state house and a gaol. The final clause provided that 
the act was not to be put in force until approved by the 
i^roprietors. It is perhaps needless to add that they 
promptly rejected it.' 

In 1728, the proprietors sent a memorial to the privy 
council asking that, in case they advised the king to 
purchase the province, they should recommend the pay- 
ment of £5,000 additional for arrears of rent. Along 
with the memorial was an estimate of the amount due 
them. From 1719 to 1728 the arrears in both North 
and South Carolina were placed at £7,200. This, to- 
gether with the fines and fees and one-tenth of the 
mines and whale fisheries amounted in all to £9,500. 
They also stated that for the ten years previous to 1719 
there had been no accounts between the proprietors and 
their receivers, a settlement of which would show at 
least £6,000 more due them.^ By the act of parliament 
passed in 1729 for establishing an agreement with seven 
of the Lords Proprietors, their request was granted and 
they were paid £5,000 for the arrears of rent.^ 

The province had now come entirely under the crown. 
On June 30, 1730, the Lords of Trade in an address to 
the king suggested that the arrears should be remitted 

1 statutes, III, 44-49. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XIII, 8-11. 

'i Statutes at Large, 2 George^ II, chapter 34. 



56 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

to the colonists under certain conditions. First, they 
should repeal the land law of 1696, because the provision 
for payment in produce at a valuation fixed by a board 
of appraisers, three nominated by the governor and 
council and three by the assembly, tended to lessen the 
value of the rents. Secondly, all possessors of land 
should be required to register their grants together with 
the amount of quit rents reserved thereon. And finally, 
all rents for the future were to be paid in proclamation 
money.^ Instructions were made out to Governor John- 
son empowering him to consent to an act embodying 
these terms.^ Such a measure was passed August 20, 
1731. Its main provisions have already been consid- 
ered in another connection. It is sufficient here to say 
that seven-eighths of all arrears of rent up to the 25th of 
the previous March were remitted, and provision made 
for future payments in proclamation money on the 25th 
of March of each year. In case a man failed to pay 
within three months after March 25, officers were em- 
powered to seize and sell his goods. If he were delin- 
quent for five years and had no goods to be levied upon, 
his land was to be forfeited, saving the rights of minors 
and femes coverts, who were to have three years in 
which to settle after coming of age or removal of cover- 
ture. Persons living in Granville county were to pay 
at Port Royal, those in Craven county at Winyaw, and 
those in Berkeley and Colleton counties at Charleston.^ 

^Public Records, Ms., XIV, 141-143. 

^lUd., 156-157. 

• Statutes, III, 289-304. It is possible that feme covert in this law 
should read feme sole. I take it that the exemption would extend to 
unmarried rather than to married women. 



QUIT EENTS 57 

The long and successful struggle on tlie part of the land 
speculators to prevent the king's disallowing this act 
has already been discussed. 

In spite of the careful provisions in the law for the 
collection of rents it seems that they were by no means 
regularly paid. An advertisement, inserted in the 
Gazette of July 13, 1734, by the receiver-general of the 
quit rents, stated that many had not paid for two years 
and some not at all. He warned delinquents to settle 
at once and threatened to levy on their goods.' These 
notices were frequently published, hence we must con- 
clude that the people were no more willing to pay the 
king than they had been to pay the proprietors. 

Attention has already been called to the appointment 
in 1739 of Henry McCulloh as '' Commissioner for 
Supervising, Inspecting, and Controlling His Majesty's 
Revenues and Grants of Lands." His duties were to 
put a stop to land frauds and to secure a better collec- 
tion of the quit rents. Having seen how he failed in 
his first duty, we will now consider briefly his attempts 
to perform the second. 

Immediately on his arrival in the province, McCul- 
loh wrote a letter to the speaker of the assembly telling 
of his anxiety to put an end to the disputes over quit 
rents and land grants, and asking the speaker to explain 
his mission to the assembly.^ At the same time he 
issued a circular letter to the freeholders of the province 
assuring them of his good intentions and begging them 
to co-operate in securing a final settlement of the 

1 8. Car. Gazette, No. 24, July 13, 1734. 

2 PuUic Records, Ms., XX, 442-445. 



58 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

troubles. Notice was given to all who had not regis- 
tered their titles in the office of the auditor-general to 
do so at once. He also warned them that land would 
be declared forfeited after five years non-payment.^ 

McCulloh's next step was to hold a conference with 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull and submit to him certain 
proposals for a quit rent bill.^ Bull sent them to the 
lower house with a message urging immediate action.^ 
There were fourteen heads in the proposals. The first 
required the registration of all mesne conveyances in 
the auditor's office within eighteen months under pen- 
alty of forfeiture, and the ninth and tenth required all 
persons holding lands by any title whatsoever, not 
within the outlines of townships, to settle them within 
four years with one white man for every one thousand 
acres of land, and, within townships, two white men 
per thousand acres.^ The commons house in committee 
of the whole agreed to these propositions in the main. 
In section one, however, they suggested a milder penalty 
than forfeiture, namely, the payment of a double or 
treble rent; and in section nine they excepted proprie- 
tary patents and provided that the owners of the land 
and their sons over sixteen should be counted as part 
of the required number of adult white settlers. They 
also agreed that a clause should be introduced to con- 
firm every part of the quit rent law of 1731 not altered 
by this act.^ On May 26, 1741, the lower house adopted 

^Public Records, Ms., XX, 445-454. 

2 Governor Glen had not yet arrived in the province. 

J Com. House Journals, Ms., XIV, 345-346. 

*Ibid., 346-353. 

5 Ihid., XV, 8-12. 



QUIT RENTS 59 

this report with some slight amendments/ The lieu- 
tenant-governor sent down a message on the 27th, 
again urging immediate action.^ In reply the house 
said that they would have to consult their constituents 
before finally passing such a law:^ An act entitled, "A 
bill to enable His Majesty's ojfificers of the revenue to 
make out and fix a more perfect and exact roll or par- 
ticular of His Majesty's quit rents; and to carry on and 
continue the same for the future . . . , " passed the house, 
June 30. '\ On the same day an order was adopted that, 
as soon as it came from the council, it should be printed 
and a copy given to each member to show to his constitu- 
ents.* . The council returned it on July 1.^ McCulloh, 
in a report to the Board of Trade, says that the council 
opposed him all the time and states incorrectly that it 
was they who ordered the bill published and distributed 
among the planters to see what effect it would have.^ 
As a matter of fact, this was done by the assembly. 
The people, continues McCulloh, were very much ex- 
cited over the prospect of being compelled to pay their 
rents and urged upon their representatives the necessity 
of crippling the act as much as possible. '^ The house 
was now ready to drop the bill if only some excuse 
could be found. This came in the presentments of the 
Charleston grand jury, made at the October session of 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XV, 24-25. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., VII, 409. 
'Ibid., 410. 

*Com. House Journals, Ms., XV, 92-93. 
5 Council Journals, Ms., VII, 420. 
s Public Records, Ms., XX, 418. 
Ubid., 418-419. 



60 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

1741. These presentments were sent to the house by 
the lieutenant-governor and read there on December 3, 
1741. The fifth clause presented the rent roll bill as 
containing ' ' divers clauses of a dangerous nature to the 
property of His Majesty's Subjects of this Province." 
The presentments were referred to a special committee 
of seven members, which reported, on December 8, that 
the fifth clause was still under the consideration of the 
house.^ Nothing more is heard of the act until March 
1, 1742, when the council sent down a message stating 
that they had passed the rent roll bill and sent it to the 
lower house as far back as the previous first of July. 
They called attention to its importance and urged the 
house to act upon it at once. The assembly replied that 
it was now too late in the session to further consider the 
matter and that they thought it better to postpone it 
altogether until the arrival of the new governor, who 
was daily expected.^ 

McCulloh was not the man to give up the struggle 
merely because he had met with this rebuff. He con- 
tinued to quarrel with the various crown officials, to 
give his advice where it was not wanted, and to make 
innumerable complaints to the home government. Soon 
after his arrival in the province he asked Mr. Hammer- 
ton, secretary of the province and receiver-general of 
the quit rents, to make out a statement of the arrears 
of rent due to March 25, 1740, and a copy of the receipts 
as entered in his books; also that, as secretary of the 
province, he should make out a list of all warrants and 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XVI, 86-87, 118-124. 

2 Ibid., XVII, 263-264, 267-268. 



QUIT RENTS 61 

grants issued since 1730. Hammerton refused to do 
this and McCulloh wrote to the Board of Trade charg- 
ing him with being short in his accounts to the crown 
about £1,500 sterling.^ Hammerton explained his re- 
fusal to grant the request on the ground that it would 
entail an immense amount of work upon his clerks, who 
were ah-eady occupied with current business. He asked 
McCulloh to send over his clerk to do the work, assuring 
him that he would have every courtesy extended him. 
This was refused, and Hammerton declared that he 
could not furnish the lists.^ These charges seem to 
have had some effect, however, for in August, 1742, 
Hammerton was superseded as receiver-general of the 
quit rents by George Saxby.^ 

McCulloh 's propensity to meddle in every question 
that came up often got him into trouble. Mr. Mani- 
gault, the public treasurer of the province, resigned 
early in 1743. McCulloh thought that it would be a 
good plan to unite the offices of treasurer and receiver 
of the quit rents. Accordingly, he wrote a letter to the 
lieutenant-governor in which he said, "I think it my 
duty to remind Your Honor of His Majesty's pleasure 
signified to you in relation to the appointment of a Pro- 
vincial Treasurer." Bull laid the letter before the 
council and they asked him what were the instructions 
referred to by McCulloh. He replied that he had none. 
The council then expressed the opinion that McCulloh 's 
conduct in asserting what was His Majesty's pleasure 

1 PuUic Records, Ms., XX, 433^34. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., X, 113-120. 

3S. Car. Gazette, No. 437, August 9, 1742. 



62 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

was unbecoming, and that, even if the king had signified 
his wish to the governor in regard to the office, it was 
none of McCulloh's business to point out the governor's 
duties to him. Bull sent a copy of this minute of the 
council to McCulloh and told him that he had no right 
to remind the governor of his instructions or dictate 
to him in regard to appointments, and that when he 
wanted advice he would go to the gentlemen appointed 
for that purpose, namely. His Majesty's council. Mc- 
Culloh did not seem to know that the treasurer was 
elected by statute and not appointed by the governor 
at all.^ 

Another attempt to secure the passage of a rent roll 
bill was made in 1743. On March 2, Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Bull sent a message to the assembly together with 
a memorial from McCulloh setting forth the disad- 
vantages attending the collection of rents because those 
who held land directly from the crown were not re- 
quired to enter memorials with the deputy auditor 
when they transferred it by mesne conveyances. Thus 
the receiver could not collect the rent because he could 
not tell who owned the land. He suggested that the 
legislature should pass an act requiring all landholders 
to give to the inquirers and collectors of the public tax 
an account of the exact quantity of land they held 
either in their own right or in the name of others; 
also an account of their grants, whether they were 
from the king or the proprietors, dates, and rents 
due thereon. The house referred this memorial 
to a committee of eight, of which Dr. Bull was 

1 Puhlic Records, Ms., XXI, 142-148. 



QUIT EENTS 63 

chairman.^ The report, made on March 8, agreed 
that the rent roll was defective, owing to the fact that 
mesne conveyances had not been recorded in the 
auditor's office. As the time for collecting the annual 
tax was now too short to carry out McCulloh's scheme, 
they suggested that a bill be brought in requiring all 
holders of land granted since the property of the prov- 
ince had been vested in the crown, whether they held 
by original grant, mesne conveyance, descent, or other- 
wise, to enter memorials in the auditor's office on oath 
within a certain time. They also recommended that 
persons entering such memorials when they transferred 
property and paying all rent due up to the time of 
transfer should be exempted from paying rent on said 
property any longer. The house took this report under 
consideration and adopted it with some amendments. 
The first paragraph was changed so as to exempt all 
who held by immediate grant from the crown. It was 
also amended in a favorable direction by the addition 
of a provision that all persons, whether original 
grantees or purchasers from them, who had sold land 
to non-residents, should register in the auditor's office 
memorials of the mesne conveyances by which they had 
sold such land. They likewise agreed with the last 
paragraph of the report providing for the introduction 
of a bill, and the same committee was ordered to draft 
one.^ No further action was taken until February 25, 
1744, when the house ordered the committee to bring 
in their bill. It was accordingly presented on March 3, 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XVIII, 4G0-463. 
^Ibid., 515-518, 524-526. 



64 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

passed through both houses on three separate readings, 
and finally became a law, May 29, 1744, under the title, 
*'An Act to remedy some defects in His Majesty's Rent 
Roll. . . ."^ The preamble stated that the provisions 
already made by law for ascertaining the quit rents 
and making up a rent roll had proved inadequate. The 
first section enacted that all persons claiming land 
under titles granted by the king since the province had 
been vested in the crown should, within eighteen 
months after the royal approvalof the act, deliver to 
the auditor-general memorials of their mesne con- 
veyances, claims, and titles, with an accurate descrip- 
tion of the land and the rents reserved thereon. Sec- 
tions two, three, and four provided that all transfers 
of land should be registered within eighteen months, 
with the usual extension of time to minors and femes 
coverts. Section five allowed persons disposing of their 
land to settled residents of the province and giving as- 
surance that the new purchaser would pay the quit rent 
for five years to be themselves discharged from the 
further payment of rent, provided that memorials of 
the sale were duly entered and all the arrears paid up 
to the time of entering the memorial. Section six stated 
that large quantities of land had been monopolized 
by a few persons and not cultivated as required by the 
instructions to Governor Johnson, and that many 
owners were willing to surrender their land so that it 
could be settled by poor Protestant settlers, but were 
unable to do so. Therefore it was enacted that the 
owners of such land, on paying the quit rents up to date, 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XIX, 241-242, 249, 345-346; Statutes, 
III, 633-637. 



QUIT RENTS 65 

might surrender to the governor and council all the 
land called for in their grants and be forever freed 
from the payment of quit rents. Section seven pro- 
vided that no land should be thus surrendered whereon 
waste had been committed by making pitch, tar, or tur- 
pentine. By section eight relief was given to persons 
deceived by frauds of surveyors and thus charged with 
rent for land which they did not possess. The final 
section provided that the act should not go into opera- 
tion until approved by His Majesty, thus differing 
from the quit rent law of 1731, which was still in force 
though it had never received the approbation of the 
king. 

In a report to the Board of Trade, under date of June 
25, 1744, Chief Justice Whitaker presented some obser- 
vations on this bill. His first was in regard to what 
were known as family rights. When the land office was 
opened in 1731, many people applied for land warrants 
in proportion to the number of people in their families 
at the rate of fifty acres for each person. These war- 
rants were so much trafficked in that the revenue officers 
could not tell who owned the lands or how to collect 
the rents. He went on to tell of McCulloh's proposals 
and then of the plan finally adopted by the legislature 
and expressed in the act under consideration. His 
second observation was in regard to the fifth section. 
This, he said, was intended to prevent the conveyance 
of land to persons unable to pay the rent. True, the 
part releasing the original holder from the payment 
of rent five years after sale might be an encroachment 
on the royal prerogative, but he thought that it would 
5 



66 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

do much good by securing a more perfect rent roll. 
Observations three, four, and five treated of that part 
of the sixth section of the act which allowed the gov- 
ernor and council to resume lands not properly culti- 
vated and to receive those surrendered by their owners. 
Whitaker called attention to the importance of this pro- 
vision and said that the assembly would not pass an 
act with such a clause except on the condition that it 
was not to go into effect until approved by the king. 
Observation six called attention to a defect in the act 
in that it applied only to land granted since the king's 
purchase, whereas the rent rolls could not be completed 
without an account of the land held under proprietary 
grants. The report then gave some figures for the year 
1742 to show how difficult it was to collect the rents. In 
that year there were held under grants from the pro- 
prietors 1,453,875 acres. The rent had been paid on 
500,000 acres and there were left 953,875 acres still un- 
accounted for. 1,885,254 acres were held under royal 
grants, of which the rent had been paid on 430,000, 
leaving 1,455,254 unaccounted for.^ 

Writing to the secretary of the Board of Trade, 
January 16, 1745, McCulloh stated his objections to the 
act. Instead of improving the revenue from the quit 
rents, he declared that it would simply open the door 
for new frauds; that the planters had long wanted a 
method of disposing of their poor lands and being re- 
lieved of the quit rents; that before he came they 
thought that they could do this by selling their land to 
transients, but he had taught them better. Now they 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXI, 338-358. 



QUIT RENTS 67 

wanted legal sanction for their conduct and it was given 
them by the fifth section of this act. The assembly had 
tried to get a clause into the bill requiring holders of 
township lands to cultivate them on penalty of forfeit- 
ure, but the council had induced them to drop it on the 
third reading. Finally, he called attention to the clause 
which allowed owners to surrender their land to the 
governor and council and be released from the payment 
of rent, and said that this was intended to give the land 
speculators in the council a chance to dispose of those 
township lands not likely to prove profitable.^ 

A month later, McCuUoh again wrote complaining 
that the Treasury Board had given him no support and 
that the Board of Trade had not laid his troubles before 
the king. He said that he had been insulted in the 
grossest manner and deprived of all means of support- 
ing himself, and that Governors Glen and Johnston 
and several other gentlemen both in North Carolina 
and South Carolina had continually misrepresented 
him.^ He closed with a series of charges against George 
Saxby, the new receiver-general of the quit rents. 
Saxby had exacted sums of money from public officers 
before he would pay their salaries, had accepted money 
from planters who were in arrears with their rent, and, 
finally, had refused to lay his accounts before Mc- 
Culloh for inspection.^ 

In the meantime the rent roll bill was being eon- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXII, 8-10. 

2 Glen was governor of South Carolina and Johnston of North 
Carolina. 

' Ibid., 30-39. 



68 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

sidered by tlie home government. The Lords of Trade, 
December 21, 1744, sent it to their special counsel for 
colonial affairs, Mr. Francis Fane, and asked his opin- 
ion thereon in point of law.' He reported favorably, 
but still the royal approbation was withheld.^ Peregrine 
Fury, the agent of the j^rovince in England, presented 
to the Board of Trade, November 12, 1747, a number 
of arguments in favor of the bill. In the first place, he 
said that it was for the service of the crown because 
it required the registration of mesne conveyances under 
royal grants, thus overcoming the defects of the former 
quit rent law which merely provided for the registra- 
tion of original titles and mesne conveyances of pro- 
prietary grants. This act, accordingly, furnished the 
officers of the revenue a better opportunity to keep up 
with the owners of land. The fifth clause would pre- 
vent the conveying of land to fictitious and transient 
persons and would allow it to be transferred only to 
those able to pay rent, since it required the grantee to 
be able to pay his rent for five years and the grantor 
to pay all arrears up to the date of transfer. In the 
third place, the act allowed those persons who held vast 
tracts of land which they were unable to cultivate to 
return them to the king so that they could be granted 
to others. To prevent the return of poor land alone, 
it was provided that whole grants and not parts might 
be surrendered, that all arrears of rent must be paid, 
and that no land could be surrendered which had been 
wasted, by making pitch, tar, or turpentine. He closed 

^Public Records, Ms., XXI, 410-411, 
^Ihid., XXII, 193-194, 198. 



QUIT EENTS 69 

his argument by calling attention to tlie final clause of 
the act, which was intended to relieve those persons, 
who, by reason of the errors of deputy-surveyors, had 
been made liable for rent on land which they did not 
possess.^ 

The fate of the act is unknown. In the absence of an 
adequate index, the records have been carefully 
searched, but no further reference to it can be found. 
The inference would be that it was not approved and 
hence never actually put in force. No further attempts 
were ever seriously made to improve the rent roll. The 
receiver-general continued to collect whatever he could, 
usually not over one-third of the amount really due. 

This chapter concludes our survey of the king as 
territorial lord of the province. We have seen him in 
conflict with his people over two questions, the grant- 
ing of land and the collection of rent. In both of these 
contests he was worsted. St. John, Whitaker, and Mc- 
Culloh failed in their efforts to preserve the royal 
domain and to secure a more regular payment of His 
Majesty's quit rents. The causes of their failure are 
not far to seek. In the first place, the whole colonial 
administrative system of Great Britain was sadly de- 
fective. There was too much official red tape and too 
great a diffusion of responsibility. Disagreeable tasks 
were very likely to be shifted back and forth between 
the Board of Trade and the Secretary of State for the 
Southern Department. The Revolution owes quite as 
much to Newcastle's ignorance and apathy as it does 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXII, 330-334. 



70 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

to the intemperate zeal of Grenville and Townsliend/ 
A second cause of failure and a natural corollary to the 
first was the growing spirit of independence in the 
colony, which rebelled at any interference on the part 
of the home government. 

1 The Diike of Newcastle was Secretary of State for the Southern 
Department from 1724 to 1748. His ignorance of colonial affairs waa 
proverbial. 



SECTION II 



GOVERNMENT 



CHAPTER I 

The Executive 

In the provinces the prerogative element was at first 
strong both in theory and in practice. Yet long before 
the actual revolt against the mother country began the 
colonists had shown their determination to govern 
themselves. The constitutional history of a royal pro- 
vince then should indicate the gradual process by which 
this change was brought about. The executive, as the 
representative of imperial control, should first be 
studied. The executive consisted of a governor and 
council selected by the crown, and of various other offi- 
cials, some chosen by the crown and some by the pro- 
vincial legislature. The governor was appointed by 
His Majesty in council on the recommendation of the 
Board of Trade. The English government of the eight- 
eenth century, and especially during the Newcastle 
regime, was corrupt to the very core, hence we often 
find the office of governor in the colonies filled by needy 
dependents of borough-mongers, whose principal desire 
was to accumulate as much money as they could, with- 
out regard to the interests of the colony or the rights 
of the king.^ 

1 The best account of the provincial governor is to be found in 
Greene, Provincial Governor, Harvard His. Studies, Vol. VII. I am in- 
debted to his work for many valuable suggestions. 

73 



74 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

The tenure was during the king's jjleasure, and the 
authority of the governor ceased on the arrival of his 
successor and the publication of his commission. His 
position was insecure. Some other courtier might pay 
more for the place or have greater influence with the 
dispensers of patronage in London, Then again the 
governor was sometimes removed because of charges 
made by the colony agent, who, in practice, was usually 
the servant of the lower house of the legislature.^ 

In the absence or inability of the governor his place 
was taken by the lieutenant-governor. In case both 
were absent, the president of the council became acting 
executive,' although he was forbidden, without a par- 
ticular order from the king, to concur in any legislation 
not immediately necessary to the peace and welfare 
of the province. The two William Bulls, father and 
son, were for many years at the head of the govern- 
ment as lieutenant-governor. The president of the 
council was twice called to the executive chair, Arthur 
Middleton from 1725 to 1730 and William Bull from 
1737 to 1738. 

The income of the governor consisted of his salary 
and various fees and fines. Going back into the pro- 
prietary period, we find that his salary was £100 in 
1677, £200 in 1702, and £400 at the close of the period.' 
Acts were passed in 1685, 1690, 1695, and 1698 regu- 

1 Tanner in Political Science Quarterly, XVI, 24-49. Greene, 
Provincial Governor, 50—51. 

2 The president was the senior member of the council. If several 
had been appointed at the same time, he was the first named in the 
commission. 

^8. Car. His. Soc. Col., I. 101, 152, 172. 



THE EXECUTIVE 75 

lating fees. For signing various warrants, liquor and 
marriage licenses, testimonials, land grants, decrees in 
chancery, etc., he received fees ranging from two shil- 
lings six pence to five pounds.^ The power to regulate 
fees, thus secured by the general assembly during the 
proj^rietary period, was never given up, in spite of the 
fact that the governor and council were often instructed 
to regulate them by executive ordinance. He was 
allowed one-third of the proceeds arising from the sale 
of vessels condemned in the admiralty court for vio- 
lating the acts of trade and navigation and usually 
some fraction of the fines and forfeitures collected. 

The annual salary itself was granted by a vote of the 
general assembly and it was in the nature of a gift 
rather than a fixed allowance. The council, in a letter 
to the Duke of Newcastle, December 19, 1728, complain- 
ing of the conduct of the assembly, declared that the 
province was well able to fix a salary of five hundred 
pounds sterling on their governor. This was the 
amount which Moore and Nicholson had received, but it 
was considered as a gift rather than a definite salary. 
That is to say, the assembly claimed the right of with- 
holding the governor's pay in case he would not com- 
ply with their demands. The government had in this 
way become so much weakened that it might be said 
"to have an executive power without a power to 
execute it." Nicholson was instructed to insist on the 
fixing of a salary and not to take any present after it 
had been so established. The assembly interpreted this 
to mean that the governor could accept gifts until they 

1 statutes, II, 3, 39-^0, 87, 144-145. 



76 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

provided a permanent salary. Consequently, they re- 
fused to make the provision and all the money which 
they paid the governor was in the nature of presents — 
presents, said the council, which were always given 
just after his assenting to a currency law or doing some- 
thing else gratifying to the assembly. They suggested 
that an instruction be given to succeeding governors 
not to accept any gift from the assembly whatsoever.^ 

President Middleton incurred the hostility of the 
assembly by opposing their paper money schemes. As 
a result, his salary was withheld entirely for several 
years and he was finally paid only a small part of what 
was really due him. Seeing that the executive was being 
made a mere tool of the legislature. Governor Johnson 
tried to induce the assembly to provide a permanent 
salary. They delayed the matter on one pretext and 
another and finally refused openly to grant the request.^ 

The assembly does not seem to have made much use 
of the power to withhold the governor 's salary entirely. 
They did, however, frequently delay the tax bill for 
months in order to force him to terms. Goveraor Boone 
did not receive one penny of salary until the arrival of 
specific instructions from the king demanding that he 
should be paid. It is not likely that the assembly would 
have yielded then had not the demand been made 
while they were rejoicing over the repeal of the Stamp 
Act. As it was, they adopted a committee report 
maintaining their right to withhold salaries whenever 

1 Public Records, Ms., XIII, 233-234. 

2 Puhlic Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 794-802. 



THE EXECUTIVE 77 

tliey pleased.' In this connection it should be said that 
His Excellency was not the only one to feel the wrath of 
the assembly. Chief Justice Robert Wright, as we 
have seen, suffered severe financial loss for protecting 
the territorial interests of the crown. 

The allowance of the governor during the entire royal 
period was £500 sterling, in addition to house rent, which 
was usually £100. As the exchange rate was seven to 
one, this appeared in the annual budget as £3,500 cur- 
rency. The fees for a time brought in as much more. 
Governor Glen complained that his fees never amounted 
to more than £300 sterling per annum, though he had 
been assured before his arrival that they would be at 
least £1,000. Mr. Mickie, for many years secretary of 
the province, stated that they were seldom less than this. 
Glen attributed the decrease to the fact that he did not 
collect the full amount to which he was entitled by law. * 
Probably the real reason was that Johnson and Brough- 
ton received a great deal in fees from the numerous land 
grants made by them. 

There was always a clause in the instructions to the 
governor which provided that in his absence from the 
province one-half his salary should go to the lieutenant- 
governor or to the acting executive. In 1745, Governor 
Glen put in a claim for one-half of all the salary paid 
to Lieutenant-Governor Bull between Glen's appoint- 
ment as governor in 1738 and his arrival in the province 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII. Part II, IGO-IGI, 165-16ff. 
.See pp. 347-349. 

2 Message to the assembly, March 26, 175G, Ibid., XXXI, Part I, 
153-154. 



78 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

in 1743. Bull sent a memorial to the assembly saying 
that during the period in question he had received an 
annual allowance of barely more than one-half the 
amount paid to Governor Johnson, and he did not think 
that he should be required to give half of that to Glen. 
The assembly referred the memorial to a committee, 
and, on March 21, 1746, adopted a report and resolu- 
tions to the effect that the money paid to Bull was a 
free gift for his services and was not intended to be 
divided with any one.^ 

As for the governor's powers and privileges, we find 
them laid down in his commissions and instructions, 
which formed the written constitution of the province. 
These documents were drawn up by the Board of Trade 
in consultation with the Treasury and Admiralty Boards 
and the law officers of the crown, and finally approved 
by order in council. The commission contained the 
general grant of power, the instructions prescribed in 
detail how it should be used, and often limited it. ^ The 
commission was a letter patent and had to be published 
by the governor immediately on his arrival in the prov- 
ince ; the instructions were to be published in whole, in 
part, or not at all, at his discretion, though he was in- 
structed to communicate to the council those articles in 
which they were specially concerned. When a new gov- 
ernor came into the province he brought his commission 
and two sets of instructions, one having to do with the 
general constitution of the province and the other refer- 
ring specifically to the acts of trade and navigation, 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXI, 149-151, 433-435. 

2 See Greene, Provincial Governor, 93-94, 



THE EXECUTIVE 79 

The general instructions to Governor Nicholson, dated 
August 30, 1720, consist of ninety-six articles and those 
in regard to trade and navigation, of twenty- four. ^ 
The general instructions to Johnson, June 10, 1730, con- 
tain one hundred and twenty-four;^ those to Glen, July 
19, 1739, one hundred and ten;^ those to Lyttleton, No- 
vember 4, 1755, one hundred and seven;* those to Boone, 
November 11, 1761, ninety-four;^ those to Montagu, 
February 19, 1766, ninety-nine;'' and finally, those to 
Lord William Campbell, June 20, 1774, ninety-four.^ 
In addition to these general instructions there were sent 
out from time to time additional instructions covering 
certain specific points. The governor's powers were 
still further detennined by the laws of parliament and 
the provincial statutes. In theory very broad, they were 
much restricted by the continual encroachments of the 
popular branch of the legislature. With the advice and 
consent of the council, he was to call assemblies of the 
freeholders, the members of which were required to take 
the usual oaths. With the consent of the council and 
the assembly he was to make laws agreeable to the laws 
of England. He was to have an absolute veto power 
and could prorogue, adjourn, and dissolve assemblies. 
He was to see that no laws of an unusual or extraordin- 
ary nature were passed without a clause suspending 

1 Public Records, Ms., VIII, 101-138, 139-165. 

2 Ibid., XIV, 147-214. 
s/6td., XX, 66-139. 
*Ibid., XXVI, 267-344. 
^Ibid., XXIX, 132-181. 
« Ibid., XXX, 309-388. 
Ubid., XXXIV, 53-135. 



80 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

their operation until the king's pleasure could be known, 
and that no private acts were passed except with a 
clause saving the rights of the king and all persons and 
corporations not mentioned in the act. All laws were 
to be sent to England within three months after the 
passage, together with the date of passage and ratifica- 
tion and the governor's observations thereon. 

The control of the executive over the finances, though 
apparently very extensive was really quite limited. 
He was authorized, with the advice and consent of his 
council, to regulate all salaries and fees, but, as we have 
seen, fees had been regulated from the earliest years of 
the province by act of the general assembly, and this 
continued to be the custom. The salaries of officers 
elected by the general assembly were determined by 
statute. The salaries of those crown officials who were 
paid from the quit rents were fixed by the king; those 
who were paid out of the public treasury, as, for ex- 
ample, the governor, the clerk of the assembly, and for 
a time the chief justice, were at the mercy of the lower 
house. Though it was rare for salaries to be withheld 
entirely, they were often reduced or delayed. No public 
money was to be disposed of otherwise than by warrant 
under the hand of the governor, by and with the consent 
of the council. As will be seen in a subsequent chapter, 
this clause did not prevent the assembly from so far 
getting control over the finances as to order money paid 
out of the treasuiy without the knowledge or consent of 
the governor and council.^ In early times the chief ex- 
ecutive was allowed some discretion in disposing of 
money voted by the general assembly, but the assembly 

1 See pp. 309-38G. 



THE EXECUTIVE 81 

soon began to designate in detail for what purposes it 
should be expended. Accounts were regularly consid- 
ered by a committee of the assembly and their report 
acted upon by the whole house. Either the governor 
or the council could reject the appropriation bill as a 
whole, but neither was allowed to make any additions 
or amendments. 

As administrative head of the province the governor's 
powers were likewise very shadowy. He appointed all 
military officials, and, with the advice and consent of 
his council, judges and justices of the peace. On good 
and sufficient cause signified to the king and the Board 
of Trade, he could remove judges, justices, sheriffs, and 
other officers. His real position in the administration, 
however, is well described in a letter from Governor 
Glen to the Duke of Bedford, dated October 10, 1748. 
Glen complained that almost all places of trust and 
profit in the province were disposed of by the general 
assembly, which in practice meant the lower house. 
They appointed the treasurer, the commissary, the In- 
dian commissioner, the controller of the duties upon 
imports and exports, the powder receiver, and various 
others.^ The executive part of the government was 
lodged in different commissioners. Thus there were 
the commissioners of the markets, of the workhouse, of 
the pilots, of the fortifications, and so on without num- 
ber. Nor did they stop at civil posts, but all ecclesi- 
astical preferments were at the disposal of the people, 
though by his instructions the power of collating to 

1 A law of 1707, repealed in 1721, gave the lower house alone the 
power of appointing these officials. See introductory chapter. 

6 



82 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

livings was vested in the governor. Most of these com- 
missioners were named by the general assembly and 
were accountable to them only. ''Thus by little and 
little the people have got the whole administration into 
their hands, and the crown is by various laws despoiled 
of its principal flowers and brightest jewels. ' ' ' 

The governor's commission empowered him, with the 
advice and consent of his council, to erect and establish 
such courts of judicature, civil as well as criminal, as 
they should think fit. The instructions, however, lim- 
ited this power by providing that he was not to ** erect 
any court or office of judicature not before erected or 
established, nor dissolve any court or office already 
erected or established without His Majesty's especial 
order." The common law courts had thus been estab- 
lished by executive act before the overthrow of the 
proprietary government. The assembly, however, en- 
croached upon this power by passing numerous judi- 
ciary laws. The governors were usually instructed to 
establish a court of exchequer, though, with the excep- 
tion of an abortive attempt during Johnson's admin- 
istration, no effort to do this was ever made.^ They 
were empowered to appoint judges, commissioners of 
oyer and terminer, justices of the peace, and other neces- 
sary judicial officers, and to see that courts of justice 
were duly and frequently held and that justice was im- 
partially administered. The governor and council con- 
stituted a court of chancery and the supreme court of 
appeal in civil cases involving a certain amount, at first 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXIII, 234-236. 

2 Ibid., XXXII, 379-380. 



THE EXECUTIVE 83 

£100, later £500 sterling. This last power was rarely, 
if ever, exercised.^ The governor alone exercised the 
jurisdiction of ordinary for granting marriage licenses, 
probate of wills, and administration of the estates of 
intestates. Finally, he was empowered to pardon all 
offenses, except treason and willful murder, and to re- 
mit fines and forfeitures under ten jaounds. In the 
excepted cases he could reprieve or suspend payment 
until the pleasure of the king be known. 

As ecclesiastical head of the province, the powers of 
the executive were very limited. He was to take care 
that God should be devoutly worshipped, that churches 
should be built and kept in good order, and that none 
but ministers in orders should administer the sacra- 
ments. The commissions and instructions both em- 
powered him to collate to benefices, but, as we have 
seen, the church act of 1706 conferred this power upon 
the Anglican freeholders of the separate parishes, and 
it was retained by them throughout the entire colonial 
period. 

His military powers were more extensive and more 
real, but here too we find evidences of the encroachments 
of the popular element. This will be treated more in 
detail in a later chapter. Here it will be sufficient to 
point out briefly the provisions in the commissions and 
instructions bearing on this subject. He was given 
full power and authority to levy, arm, muster, command, 
and employ all persons whatsoever, residing in the prov- 
ince, to use them both within or without the province, 
to appoint all officers, and, with the advice and consent 

^rullic Records, Ms., XXXII, 375. 



84 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of his council, to build, equip, and dismantle forts and 
fortifications, and declare martial law. As vice-admiral 
lie had control over the colonial fleet with power to ap- 
X3oint captains, lieutenants, masters of ship, and other 
officers, but, inasmuch as the navy never consisted of 
more than two small scout boats and two galleys, the 
duties of this position were not very onerous. He was 
empowered to grant letters of marque and reprisal 
against princes or states not in amity with the king of 
England, and to punish offenders against maritime law. 
These powers were exercised largely through the court 
of vice-admiralty which sat at Charleston. Pirates 
were tried under a special commission from the crown, 
the chief commissioner being the judge of the admiralty 
court. 

The diplomatic or quasi-diplomatic powers of the ex- 
ecutive were exercised in connection with the relations 
of the province to the Indians and to other colonies. 
The governor and council could declare war against 
the Indians in an emergency, and they also made treaties 
of peace with them, though the power was not expressly 
granted. The governor's powers in regard to Indian 
affairs were very much restricted after 1756 through 
the appointment of a special crown officer, known as 
the superintendent of Indian affairs. The negotiations 
with the neighboring colonies of Virginia, North Caro- 
lina, and Georgia were mainly in regard to Indians and 
boundaiy disputes. 

In addition to these ordinary functions of the gov- 
ernor, mention should be made of several miscellaneous 
powers and duties. His position as the king's land 



THE EXECUTIVE 85 

agent has already been discussed. He was empowered, 
with the advice and consent of his council, to establish 
fairs, marts, markets, ports, and harbors. The assembly 
encroached upon this power by passing two acts in Feb- 
ruary, 1724, one for settling a fair and markets in the 
town of Dorchester in Berkeley County and a similar 
act for Ashley River Ferry Town also in Berkeley 
County.^ He was required to send to the Board of 
Trade maps of the territory under his government, lists 
of officers, a particular account of all establishments of 
jurisdictions, courts, and offices, and a semi-annual ac- 
count of the revenue raised and disbursed. Journals of 
the council and assembly were to be sent over to England 
regularly. Separate instructions required him to see 
that the trade and navigation acts were strictly enforced. 
Finally, the governor and council were empowered to 
do anything for the good of the province, whether spe- 
cifically instructed to do so or not, provided that they 
were not to declare war without His Majesty's consent, 
except against Indians in emergencies, and provided 
they should at once make known their action to the 
Board of Trade and to one of the king's secretaries of 
state. 

The second branch of the executive department was 
His Majesty's council. The duties of this body have 
already been touched upon in discussing the powers of 
the governor. A few words should be said in regard 
to its personal constitution as provided for in the gov- 
ernor's instructions. There were twelve members of 

I statutes, III, 214-219. 



86 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the council named in the instructions to each governor.^ 
In addition to these, the surveyor-general of the cus- 
toms for the southern district of America and later the 
superintendent of Indian affairs were members extra- 
ordinary. These men were appointed by the crown 
usually on the governor's recommendation. The gov- 
ernor, on his arrival, administered the oaths of office to 
them and read his commission and those articles of his 
instructions in which their advice and consent were re- 
quired. He was to allow them freedom of debate and 
vote. Any three of the council constituted a quorum, 
but the governor was not to act with less than five mem- 
bers except in an emergency. He was required to make 
up a list of the names of twelve persons fit to serve as 
councilors and send it to the Board of Trade and one 
of the principal secretaries of state. From this list 
they filled vacancies. In case the number of councilors 
in the province fell below seven, the governor could ap- 
point up to that number, but the names and qualifica- 
tions of his appointees had to be at once submitted to 
the Board of Trade for ratification. The governor was 
forbidden to augment or diminish the number of the 
council as thus established or to suspend any of the 
members without good and sufficient cause or without 
the consent of a majority of the council. In case, how- 
ever, he should have reasons for suspending a councilor, 
not fit to be communicated to the council, he might dis- 
pense with their consent. In either case he was required 
to submit to the home government at once the reasons 

1 Except in those to Nicholson. He selected his own council after his 
arrival in the province. 



THE EXECUTIVE 87 

for his action together with the reply of the suspended 
party. Councilors absent from the province a certain 
length of time lost their positions. 

The functions of the council have already been con- 
sidered in part. They were an executive board, a court 
of judicature, and the upper house of the legislature. 
His Excellency presided over them when sitting in their 
executive or judicial capacities, and usually before 1739 
when they sat as a legislative house. The anomalous 
position of this body is shown by the fact that the gov- 
ernor sometimes asked their opinion as a council whether 
he should sign bills which they had already passed as 
the upper branch of the legislature. Up to about 1760 
the members were regularly chosen from among the 
wealthiest and most influential men of the province. 
Being men of wealth, city merchants and importers, 
they were conservative and willing to be dependent upon 
the crown rather than to suffer from the paper money 
vagaries of the planter element in the assembly. After 
1760, they were selected from the class of office-holders 
and placemen, carpet-bag politicians, who had no other 
interest in the province than to fill their capacious 
pocketbooks. Accordingly, throughout the entire col- 
onial period the council inclined to support the gov- 
ernor in his struggle with the assembly. What we have 
termed the conflict between the prerogative and popular 
elements in the government was really, then, similar to 
the long constitutional struggle in England between the 
executive and the legislature. Side by side with the 
governor was a body both executive and legislative in 
form, but executive in spirit; strictly speaking, a body 



88 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

analogous neitlier to the House of Lords nor to tlie 
Privy Council, but rather to the product which would 
result from the blending of the two. 

The most important of the other executive officials 
were the lieutenant-governor, sui*veyor-general of the 
lands, register, auditor, receiver-general of the quit 
rents, attorney-general, secretary of the province, pro- 
vost marshal, and comptroller of the customs, appointed 
by the crown; and the public treasurer, country comp- 
troller, commissary-general, powder receiver, commis- 
sioner for Indian affairs, and the commissioners of 
fortifications, pilots and others, elected by the general 
assembly. The functions of these officials are for the 
most part explained by their titles. Some of them will 
be referred to more in detail in subsequent chapters. 



CHAPTER II 

The Legislature 

A BRIEF account of the early history of the legislature 
has already been given in the introductory chapter on 
the proprietary period. To recapitulate, there was at 
first a grand council of ten members, one half chosen 
by the proprietors and the other half by the freeman. 
This body for a time exercised all the powers of gov- 
ernment, legislative, executive, and judicial. The free- 
holders were also empowered to elect a parliament of 
twenty members, who, with the five deputies of the pro- 
prietors, were to constitute the legislative department. 
The power to initiate legislation was reserved to the 
grand council. In 1692, the parliament began to be 
known as the general assembly, was divided into two 
houses, and the elective element dropped out of the 
council. A year later the lower house secured an equal 
power of initiation with the upper. The council con- 
sisted of seven members, one deputy for each pro- 
prietor, from this time until near the close of the pro- 
prietary period. The attempt then made to increase 
the number was regarded as a grievance by the popular 
party. This form of government was retained when 
the province fell under the king's control, though the 
royal commission and instructions to Governor Nichol- 
son defined a little more clearly the structure and 

89 



90 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

powers of the council and its relation to the other 
branches of the legislature. 

The government was based upon the English model. 
Corresponding to the king and privy council were the 
governor and his council ; to the legislative branches of 
king, lords, and commons, were the governor, council, 
and commons house of assembly. In addition, the king 
himself, or rather the British ministry, constituted 
what we may term a fourth branch of the legislature. 
The instructions to the governor usually suggested such 
legislation as the home government desired to see en- 
acted. Moreover, there were some matters which the 
colonial legislature could not consider at all without 
consent first being obtained from the crown. Certain 
other measures could not be put in force until notice 
was received of His Majesty's approval. Ordinary 
laws went into operation at once but they became void 
if the king disallowed them. It was an open question 
as to whether the home government could nullify an 
act after they had once approved it. For this reason 
they rarely gave any measure their approbation, but 
merely let it remain in force under sufferance. In case 
it gave trouble it could be more easily repealed. 

Of the three branches of the legislature in the colony 
we come first to the governor. Reference has already 
been made to his legislative functions in the chapter 
on the executive. He had an absolute veto power and 
the privilege of recommending legislation by message. 

The appointment, tenure, number, and qualifications 
of the councilors have also been considered. A few 
words may here be said in regard to their powers, 



THE LEGISLATURE 91 

privileges and methods of procedure as a legislative 
body. They occupied a position analogous to that of 
the British House of Lords. In theorj^ they had the 
same powers as the lower house, but in reality very 
much less. In spite of the royal instructions that they 
should have "the like power of framing, mending, or 
altering money bills as the assembly," the lower house 
refused to allow any interference on their part. All 
that they could do was to reject money bills as a whole. 
This they sometimes did when the house made some 
particularly extravagant claims. The assemblj^ would 
then refuse to proceed on further business, no taxes 
could be raised, the governor's salary fell into arrears, 
until finally so much pressure would be brought to bear 
that the council would be compelled to give way. This 
mastery over the public purse gave the commons house^ 
almost entire control over legislation. All officials 
chosen by statute were really their choice. Several con- 
flicts arose over the appointment of the public treasurer 
and the colony agent, but the governor and council al- 
ways had to yield. Finally, as we shall see, the power 
of the council to initiate legislation or even to sit as an 
upper house at all was questioned. 

The members of the council were to have freedom 
of debate and vote on all matters of public concern, and 
they were exempt from arrest during the sitting of the 
general assembly. 

In studying the organization and procedure of this 
body its double, or rather triple, character must be kept 

1 The lower house is in its journals usually called the commons house 
of assembly, sometimes the assembly, and again merely the commons 
house. 



92 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

in mind. As a branch of the legislature, it sat only 
when the lower house was in session. Since it often 
met in its executive and judicial capacities during the 
recesses of the general assembly and since its members 
held by an indefinite tenure, there was no need for 
organization at the beginning of each legislative session, 
as was the case in the assembly. During the proprie- 
tary and the early years of the royal period, His Ex- 
cellency had a seat in the council in its legislative as 
well as in its executive and judicial capacities. The 
result of this was inextricable confusion in the journals. 
After 1731 the executive body was termed in its jour- 
nals, the council or our board, the legislative, generally, 
the upper house of assembly. An attempt was also 
made to keep the journals separate, though some con- 
fusion was caused by the refusal of the assembly to use 
the term upper house. On April 11, 1739, the upper 
house resolved that the presence of the governor or 
commander in chief during the sitting of the house was 
of an unparliamentary nature and that they would enter 
into no debates during his presence.^ They had good 
precedents for this. Richard West, special counsel to 
the Board of Trade, had given an opinion in 1725 that 
the governor could not legally vote when the council was 
sitting in a legislative capacity.' In January, 1736, as 
the result of a contest in New York, the Board of Trade 
decided that Governor Cosby was neither to sit nor to 
vote in the council while it was acting as a branch of 
the legislature.^ When Governor Glen arrived in the 

1 Council Journals {Upper House), Ms., VII, 218. 

2 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 238-239. 

3 2V. y. Col. Doc, VI, 39-40. 



THE LEGISLATURE 93 

province in December, 1743, he became angry at tlie 
attempt to exclude him from the legislative council, 
and made a speech endeavoring to show from the prac- 
tice of the other provinces and the home government 
that he had a right to be present. His exclusion, he 
declared, was contrary to the British constitution, "for 
that the King's Throne in the House of Peers was not 
13laced there as an ornament to the Room, but because 
he had a right to be there, and the Lord Coke says that 
the Parliament is composed of two houses. The King 
and House of Lords make one House, and the House of 
Commons is the other." He went on to say that he 
had the same right to be present that the king had in 
the House of Lords.^ Whether or not the council were 
as ignorant of the British constitution as Governor 
Glen and were convinced by his arguments is not 
known. At any rate, they agreed that he might be 
present, provided he would never take any part in the 
debates or receive any messages coming to their house 
or give answer thereto.^ Glen did not like this purely 
ornamental position and made the serious mistake of 
joining hands with the lower house in an attack on the 
legislative powers of the council. He seems to have 
attended the meetings occasionally until 1749, and then 
to have ceased altogether. Finally, he came into their 
chamber on April 29, 1756, as they were reading a 
message previously sent by him. The reading was at 
once postponed and the house adjourned to the after- 
noon.^ After that I can find no further reference to 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXIII, 240-241. 

2 Council Jovrnuls, Ms., XII, 7. 

^Council Joiinials (Uj^pcr Hovse), Ms., XXIV, Part II, 60. 



94 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the presence of the governor in the legislative council. 
A committee report of the upper house, adopted May 
7, 1745, during the controversy with Glen, calls atten- 
tion to the confusion caused by the governor's presence 
in their chamber. The report says that the legislature 
of the province consisted of three distinct and separate 
branches after the model of the mother country, 
' ' neither of which therefore ought or can mix or blend 
itself with either of the others or be set aside by the 
other two;" that the consent of the council and the 
consent of the governor were to be obtained separately ; 
that there was the same authority for terming the 
council in its legislative capacity a house as there was 
for terming the assembly a house; that the governor, 
being a separate and distinct branch of the legislature 
had no more right to be present in the legislative coun- 
cil than he had to be present in the assembly ; that his 
presence in the upper house had caused much con- 
fusion. A comparison of the journals of the council 
and upper house would show that both often met the 
same forenoon or the same afteraoon. The governors 
had not been content to call meetings before or after 
the assembly business was done, but would have council 
meetings at intervals between and would continue to 
sit in the great chair of the council chamber when the 
upper house met. The result was that members of the 
assembly coming up with messages were at a loss to 
know who was the president, as at one time the body 
would be a council, then again, an upper house. Nay, 
sometimes judicial matters came up and it was suddenly 
turned into a court of chancery. This had caused con- 



THE LEGISLATUKE 95 

fusion in the journals, the clerk often speaking of the 
upper house as the board, and sometimes even the mem- 
bers used this language.' 

Messages from the upper house to the lower were 
signed sometimes by the governor and again by the 
governor and the president of the council jointly. 
After 1739, however, though the governor continued to 
preside over the council and to sign messages from it 
to the assembly, the president or senior councilor pre- 
sided over the upper house and signed its messages. 
Other officers of the upper house were the clerk, mes- 
senger, doorkeeper, and an official known as the master 
in chancery, who, among other duties, carried messages 
to the assembly. The salaries of these officials as 
shown in the estimates for the year 1751-1752 were: 
to the clerk, £300; to the master in chancery, door- 
keeper, and messenger, £200 each.^ The master in 
chancery, William Pinckney, was at that time also 
deputy secretary of the province. 

The third branch of the legislature was variously 
known as the lower house, the house, the commons 
house, the assembly, and the commons house of as- 
sembly. The constitution of this body can best be 
studied from the several election laws passed at dif- 
ferent times. The first statute on the subject, entitled, 
''An Act to Regulate the Election of Members of 
Assembly," was passed October 15, 1692.'' It was 
repealed by the Lords Proprietors, April 10, 1693, 
because it allowed all persons to vote who made oath 

' Council Journals, Ms., XIII, 170-172. 
2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, 470. 
^Statutes, II, 73. Title only. 



96 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A PwOYAL PROVINCE 

that they were worth over ten pounds. The proprietors 
said that this would allow pirates to vote and that only 
freeholders should possess the franchise.' Another 
law, enacted in 1694, provided for biennial elections 
and forbade a discontinuance of the sittings of the gen- 
eral assembly for more than one year.^ An act of 
November 4, 1704, is the first complete election law 
that has been preserved. The sheriffs of the counties 
were made returning officers, and elections were by 
ballot. Residence in the county or precinct from which 
a member was returned was a necessary qualification.* 
The next act, that of December 15, 1716, made the 
parish the unit of representation.* The church act of 
1706 divided the province into parishes, and, as it was 
very inconvenient for all the people to go to Charleston 
to cast their votes, it was decided to make use of these 
divisions. Any person possessing personal property 
worth five hundred pounds currency or five hundred 
acres of land in a parish was eligible to election from 
that parish. This seemed to imply that a man could 
stand for any parish in which he had the requisite 
amount of property. An additional act, passed June 
29, 1717, made residence in the parish a necessary 
qualification.^ The repeal of these two laws by the 
proprietors, July 22, 1718,'' was one of the grievances 
which led to the revolution. An act very similar 

1 Rivers, Sketch of the His. of S. Car., 437. 

2 Statutes, II, 79-80. 

3 Ibid., 249-251. 
*Ibid., 683-691. 
5 Ibid., Ill, 2-4. 
^Ibid., 31. 



THE LEGISLATURE 97 

to them, but containing some important changes, was 
passed March 20, 1719. According to this members 
were neither required to live nor to hold property 
within the parish from which they were elected. 
There was the usual property qualification, but it 
might be anywhere within the province. This was 
an important innovation and it was followed in 
subsequent acts. Another important feature of the 
law was that nineteen members were to constitute a 
quorum of the house.^ This act was likewise repealed 
by the proprietors, but the repeal was disregarded and 
the law declared still in force by the reviving and con- 
tinuing act of February 12, 1720.- 

After the province had been taken under the govern- 
ment of the crown, there was passed, September 19, 
1721, "An Act to ascertain the manner and form of 
electing members to represent the inhabitants of this 
Province in the Commons House of Assembly, and to 
appoint who shall be deemed and adjudged capable of 
choosing or being chosen members of the said House. ' '^ 
This remained the election law of South Carolina until 
after the establishment of commonwealth government 
during the Revolution. 

The third section provided for the qualifications of 
electors. Every free white man over twenty-one years 
of age, professing the Christian religion, a resident 
of the province for one year before the issue of the 
writs, and possessing a freehold of fifty acres or pay- 

• statutes, II, 50-55. 

2 Ihid., 55, 103. 

3 Ibid., 135-140. 

7 



98 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

ing twenty shillings a year tax might vote in the parish 
in which he lived or in any other in which he had the 
requisite qualifications. I do not think that this could 
be interpreted as giving to any person the right to vote 
in more than one parish at the same election. 

Section eight provided for the qualifications for 
members of the assembly. To be eligible, a man had to 
be a freeborn subject of Great Britain or the dominions 
belonging thereto, or a foreigner naturalized by act 
of parliament, twenty-one years of age, a resident of 
the province for twelve months, and owner of five hun- 
dred acres of land and ten slaves or else of houses and 
town lots worth one thousand pounds. Following the 
act of 1719, residence in the parish was not required. 

Within these limitations the house was to judge of 
the qualifications of its members. The election law 
provided that each member should take certain state 
oaths before the governor. On two or three occasions 
His Excellency took advantage of this to pass upon the 
credentials of members and as a result became in- 
volved in disputes with the assembly. In April, 1725, 
Governor Nicholson refused to administer the stat;e 
oaths to James Akin, returned from the parishes of St. 
Thomas's and St. Dennis's. In reply to the remon- 
strances of the house, he sent a copy of the thirty-fifth 
article of his instructions, with a mark calling special 
attention to the last section, which enjoined him not to 
allow to the assembly in South Carolina any power or 
privileges whatsoever not allowed by His Majesty to 
the members of the House of Commons in England. 
He went on to say that a bill of indictment found by 



THE LEGISLATUEE 99 

the grand jury was hanging over Akin, for which he 
was to be tried before the superior court on the follow- 
ing Wednesday, and that he could not qualify him until 
he was acquitted, unless the assembly were able to find 
from the journals of the English House of Commons a 
case where such a person had taken his seat. The 
assembly cited as a precedent a case which came up in 
the twenty- third year of Elizabeth's reign, where a 
member of the Commons was indicted for felony and 
it was decided that he should remain a member of the 
house until convicted; otherwise, innocent persons 
might be deprived of their seats. Sir Matthew Hale's 
treatise on The Original Institution, Poiver, mid Juris- 
diction of Parliament was given as the authority.^ 

Mr. Akin did not take the oaths until May 13, about 
three weeks after the date set for his trial. Whether 
he was convicted or not the records do not show, but 
it certainly looks as though Governor Nicholson carried 
his point.^ 

The second case was of a religious character. Thomas 
Lynch, Charles Lewis, Michael Darby, James Stobo, 
William McMahan, and John Bee, Protestant Dissent- 
ers, were elected to the assembly which met January, 
1728. President Middleton refused to qualify them 
because they would not take the state oaths on the Evan- 
gelists. He defended his position by an appeal to the 
election law of 1721 and also to the thirty-fifth article 
of the governor's instructions, the same that Nicholson 

' This work, published in London in 1707, is now regarded as spuri- 
ous. See article of Hale, Diet, of Nat. Biog., XXIV, 23. 
2 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, J7G-177, 180-181, 200. 

IL.ofC. 



100 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

had cited in the Akin case. His argument was that, 
inasmuch as the members of the House of Commons in 
England were required to take the state oaths on the 
Evangelists, the members of the assembly in South 
Carolina must do the same. A bill was at once passed 
through the house for enabling these men to qualify ac- 
cording to their profession. The passage of this would 
have obviated the objection based on the election act, 
though not that based on the royal instructions. But 
it was not to pass, for the council rejected it on the 11th 
by unanimous vote, saying that they could not antici- 
pate the royal will by passing such a measure. The 
assembly acquiesced in this settlement of the matter and 
requested the issue of writs for new elections to fill the 
vacancies.^ 

The Gadsden case, the most important of all in its 
results, will be considered in detail in the final chapter.' 

The election act of 1721 apportioned the representa- 
tives as follows: 

Parish. Members. 

St. Philip's Charleston 5 

Christ Church 2 

St. John's 3 

St. Andrew's ^ 

St. George's 2 

St. James's Goose Creek 4 

St. Thomas's and St. Dennis's 3 

St. Paul's 4 

St. Bartholomew's 4 

St. Helena's 4 

St. James's Santee with Winyaw 2 

Total 36 

1 Coiincil Journals, Ms., IV, 116, 119, 120-121, 124-127. 

2 See pp. 340-347. 



THE LEGISLATUEE 101 

As the province grew, new parishes were created and 
new representatives added. By 1770 there were forty- 
eight members from twenty-two parishes/ Still the 
addition of representatives was by no means in propor- 
tion to the development of the province. At the time 
of the Revolution and for many years afterwards, the 
low-country people were far better represented than 
their neighbors in the interior. 

Forty days before the time appointed for the meeting 
of the general assembly, election writs were issued by 
the governor and council, directed to the church wardens 
of the several parishes, or, in case there were no war- 
dens, to such other persons as the governor and council 
should select. These wardens or other election officials 
were required to take an oath before a justice of the 
peace of their county that they would faithfully execute 
the writs. Public written notice was given two Sun- 
days before the election either at the door of the parish 
church or at some other jjlace mentioned in the act. 
The polls were kept open two days, from nine in the 
morning to four in the afternoon, and were presided 
over by the wardens. The wardens notified the persons 
elected by posting their names on the door of the parish 
church within seven days after the election. 

On the day appointed the members-elect met at 
Charleston. After a quorum of nineteen appeared, the 
lower house organized by electing a chairman. A ver- 
bal message was sent to the governor by two of the 
members desiring to know when he would be pleased to 
administer the state oaths. The governor sent down a 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 373. 



102 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

verbal message by the master in chancery saying that 
he was ready. All the members present then went up 
to the council chamber and took the state oaths. Re- 
turning to their house they took the oath of qualification 
as members of the assembly before some one of their 
number who was a justice of the peace. The chairman 
then informed the house that His Excellency desired 
them to choose a speaker. They proceeded to the elec- 
tion and then sent two members up to the council cham- 
ber with a verbal message that they had chosen their 
speaker and were ready to present him to the governor 
for his approbation. The governor announced his 
readiness to receive them, the members of the house 
chose two of their number to present the speaker, and 
went to the council chamber in a body. The speaker 
was presented and the governor signified his appro vaL 
Following the English custom, the speaker then made 
a speech desiring that the house might have liberty and 
freedom of speech and all their just privileges. His 
Excellency agreed to allow this and the house, retiring 
to their own chamber, chose their other officers. The 
next business was to receive the returns of the church 
wardens. One of the wardens from each parish brought 
in the election writ, together with a return that an elec- 
tion had been held on the specified date and that the 
persons named in the return had been duly elected. 

After passing on the credentials of members, the as- 
sembly was again summoned to the council chamber and 
the governor addressed both houses, sometimes speak- 
ing to one, sometimes to the other, and again to both 
collectively, telling them of the nature of the business 



THE LEGISLATURE 103 

to be done during the session. Retiring to their own 
chamber, the house prepared an address in answer to 
the governor 's speech and sent it up by two or three of 
their number. Members who had been elected from 
more than one parish now made known for which they 
intended to sit, and the house notified the governor and 
council of the vacancies thus caused, and asked that 
writs for new elections be issued. Vacancies were also 
caused by the refusal of members to serve or to take the 
oath on the Evangelists. The assembly was now ready 
to begin the regular routine business of the session. 
Standing committees on religion, privileges and elec- 
tions, grievances, trade, and courts of justice were ap- 
pointed. The annual tax bill was introduced and 
petitions were read and referred to the proper com- 
mittees. 

The members of the assembly possessed as extensive 
powers and privileges as "any member or members of 
the Commons House of Assembly of the province here- 
tofore of right had, might, could, or ought to have in 
the province," provided they were in accordance with 
His Majesty's thirty-fifth instruction. This article in 
Governor Nicholson's instructions enumerated certain 
privileges which were not to be allowed to the assembly. 
They were not to adjourn themselves, except for very 
short periods, without the consent of the governor ; they 
were not to arrogate to themselves the sole control over 
money bills; and finally they were not to exercise any 
power or privilege not allowed by His Majesty to the 
House of Commons in Great Britain. The assembly 
maintained that this instruction guaranteed to them all 



104 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the powers and privileges of the British House of Com- 
mons. They possessed the same exclusive control over 
financial measures which the House of Commons had. 
When His Majesty said that the council must have an 
equal share in framing money bills, he referred to acts 
providing for the issue of paper currency, and not to 
the ordinary supply bills. Having carried their point, 
they were able by withholding supplies to exercise con- 
siderable influence over all legislation and to a large 
extent over matters purely executive in character. 

The privileges of members were about the same as 
those of the councilors. They possessed freedom of de- 
bate and vote, and were exempt from arrest during the 
sitting of the general assembly. The privilege last men- 
tioned might, however, be suspended by a vote of the 
house. Thus, in April of 1726, Captain Richard Smith, 
a member of the assembly, was arrested for debt. The 
house demanded his release and instructed their mes- 
senger to take the provost marshal into custody. Smith 
wrote to the assembly requesting them to waive his 
privileges, as he intended as soon as possible to pay his 
debts like a man of honor and secure his release. The 
house agreed to the request.^ Then again, in 1754, 
Thomas Wright was imprisoned on a writ issued by 
David Graeme, an attorney at law. Wright was re- 
leased on the demand of the house, but a resolution, 
adopted on March 2, indicated the power to suspend 
the privileges of the assembly. Thus they resolved 
that Graeme was guilty of a breach of their privileges 
in issuing a writ for the arrest of a member "without 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 336-343. 



THE LEGISLATUEE 105 

having Privilege of Assembly."' The right to im- 
prison for contempt was also claimed as a privilege of 
the house. The two most famous cases in which the 
right was exercised were that of the merchant petition- 
ers against the paper money act of 1722 and that of Dr. 
Cooper and others during the controversy over land 
grants in 1733, both of which are discussed in other 
connections. 

The legislative procedure in South Carolina differed 
in one veiy important respect from that used in the 
British parliament. In parliament bills were read three 
times in one house and then sent to the other. In the 
colony they were read three times in each house alter- 
nately. There were numerous disputes in regard to the 
method of suggesting amendments, especially in the 
case of money bills. Toward the close of 1725 a quarrel 
over this subject delayed the passage of the annual tax 
bill. After the measure had passed the commons on its 
second reading, the council inserted some amendments 
in the body of the bill, according to the usual custom. 
The lower house struck them out and passed the meas- 
ure on its third reading. On its final passage, the 
council re-inserted the amendments. The lower house 
resolved that it was unparliamentaiy to amend any bill 
after it had been read three times, and especially a 
money bill. After some discussion the council yielded 
and the measure was passed. The attempt to decide 
upon a definite method of procedure for the future was 
unsuccessful.^ 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIX, 163. 

2/6trf., VII, 250, 287, 295, 298-299, 301-310, 314-317. 



106 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

A similar dispute in 1739 led to the adoption of a 
final plan of procedure. A joint committee agreed upon 
the following compromise, which was accepted by the 
two houses : 

''First. That bills shall be read alternately three times in 
each house. 

"Second. That either house shall amend on the first and 
second reading. 

"Third. That if the bill arises in the upper house, the 
same house may also amend on the third reading. 

"Fourth. The same rule to be observed by the upper 
house if the bill arises in the lower house. 

"Fifth. But if a bill which arose in the upper house and 
passed there a third time is thought necessary to be amended 
in the lower house on a third reading in the lower house, such 
amendment shall not be made before a conference be desired 
by the lower house on such amendments. 

"Sixth. The same rule to be observed by the upper house 
if the bill arises in the lower house. 

"Seventh. In case of subsidy bills, if the upper house 
shall think any amendments necessary to be made therein, 
that house shall make a schedule of the amendments pro- 
posed and send them down with the bill to the lower house, 
and the amendments, if they are approved of by the lower 
house, shall be read and passed by the lower house and added 
to the bill and then be returned to the upper house to be 
passed by them."^ 

The only real controversy was over the seventh ar- 
ticle. The council agreed to it because of the dangers 
from foreign war and domestic insurrection,^ but said 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XII, 188-191. 

2 The Stono slave uprising had occurred just three months before 
this, in September, 1730. 



THE LEGISLATURE 107 

that they suspended their just claims to amend money 
bills only with the proviso that this agreement should 
not be claimed or admitted as a precedent for any fu- 
ture assembly/ The lower house also resolved that 
their consenting to a conference committee on the method 
of passing bills should not be regarded as a precedent, 
as they already had the sole control over money bills 
and had agreed to this arrangement merely to preserve 
hannony.^ 

This method of suggesting amendments was re- 
adopted by succeeding assemblies until 1745, and, al- 
though not formally renewed after that time, continued 
to be the practice until the end of the colonial period.^ 
The lower house, however, regularly disregarded 
amendments to money bills and soon refused to receive 
them at all. At the instance of the assembly, the Brit- 
ish plan of reading measures three times in one house 
before sending them to the other, was adopted in 1748. 
The change does not seem to have given satisfaction, 
however, for the old custom was re-established at the 
beginning of the following session.* 

Following the act of 1719, the law of 1721 provided 
that nineteen members should constitute a quorum. 
This remained fixed until the Revolution, although, as 
we have seen, the number of representatives was in- 
creased to forty-eight. Governor Glen, in a letter to 
the Duke of Bedford, dated October 10, 1748, com- 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XII, 195. 
2 Ibid., 211-212. 

» Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 326-327. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIII, 162-163, 191-192. 197-198, 218- 
219, XXIV, 183. 



108 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

plained that members frequently absented themselves on 
purpose to break a quorum and obstruct business, and 
suggested that the number required be decreased. He 
said that seventeen and eighteen members would often 
meet day after day and he would be compelled to pro- 
rogue them for lack of a quorum/ Seven members 
might meet and adjourn from day to day and summon 
absentees to attend. Ten affirmative votes were neces- 
sary to enact a law. 

The efforts of the executive to continue the existence 
of a legislature indefinitely was a grievance common 
both to the colonies and to the mother country. For- 
tunately this question was settled in South Carolina 
before the downfall of proprietary rule. The biennial 
provision in the act of 1694 remained in force until 
superseded by the election law of 1721. The latter 
measure provided that every general assembly should 
be dissolved within three years from the date of issue 
of the writs and that meetings should not be discon- 
tinued for a period longer than six months. 

This provision was put to a test in the very assembly 
which passed it. The writs were issued June 16, 1721, 
so the terms of the members would expire June 16, 
1724. The election was held at a time when the people 
were rejoicing because the king had approved the revo- 
lution of 1719 and taken the province under his own 
control. Governor Nicholson saw that the enthusiasm 
was waning and that a new assembly would be less 
loyal to His Majesty's interests. Consequently, on June 
10, he recommended the passage of an act extending 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIII, 244-245. 



THE LEGISLATURE 109 

the existing assembly to October, 1725, a period of six- 
teen months. If this were not done, he threatened not 
to call another election until he received commands 
from Great Britain, or until it was absolutely necessary 
for him to do so. The house replied that they could see 
no reason for extending the assembly beyond the time 
limited by law, and that they felt sure the governor and 
council would call a new one whenever the interest of 
the province should demand it. 

On Monday the 15th, His Excellency sent down a 
letter just received from the agent in England and 
urged the house to consider it at once. At the same 
time he suggested that they could dispose of all the 
business before them during the week, and there would 
be no need for another meeting until fall or spring. 
They assured him that there was no necessity for ex- 
tending their session and begged him to call a new 
assembly at once. The message was sent by Captains 
Simmond and Seabrooke. They reported, on their re- 
turn, that they had read part of it to His Excellency 
when he exclaimed, '^Go, I'll call an assembly when 
I please." He sent down a rather petulant message 
saying that the later a new assembly was convened the 
better it would be, since bad men would be elected who 
would work the country's ruin. 

The following day the commons informed Nicholson 
that their session would terminate that day according 
to law and announced their readiness to pass such laws 
as were before the general assembly and to dispatch 
other necessary business. As he still refused to dissolve 
them, a resolution was adopted declaring that the ses- 



110 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

sion of the general assembly was by law at an end. A 
minute from the Council Journals of the following day 
says, ''The Commons House having without the con- 
sent of this House, broke up, though they had a mes- 
sage to the contrary. His Excellency was pleased to send 
for their clerk, and declared that he looked upon it as 
arbitrary, illegal, and like their commonwealth princi- 
ples (brought from New England) next to a Re- 
bellion."^ 

There was no other attempt made to extend an assem- 
bly beyond the three years' limit. A law of 1745 pro- 
vided for annual elections and another of 1748 for 
biennial elections, but both were rejected by the king 
and the old triennial act remained in force. 

It was more difficult for the commons to enforce the 
other provision that sessions of the house should not be 
discontinued for a period longer than six months. 
After Nicholson's assembly dissolved itself in June, 
1724, the new one did not meet until the following Feb- 
ruary. As a rule such infractions were not the result 
of any scheme on the part of the governor to deprive 
the people of representation, but were simply due to the 
fact that it best suited the convenience of the members. 

The officers of the lower house were the speaker, 
clerk, messenger, deputy messenger, and cashier. 
There were three distinct steps in the election of a 
speaker. When a new assembly met they first obtained 
leave from the governor to organize and choose their 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 37-38, 39, 56-57, 58-59, 61, 70; 
Council Journals, Ms., II, 306. For a discussion of the influence of New 
England on the other colonies, see Greene, Provincial Governor, 177-180. 



THE LEGISLATUKE 111 

officers. Then, the speaker was chosen by ballot, and, 
finally, he was sent to the governor for his approbation. 
This brought up two questions: Was it necessary to 
obtain His Excellency's consent before proceeding to 
election? Did the right to approve imply the right to 
disapprove and require a new choice? Henry Middle- 
ton was elected by the house, January 27, 1747, to suc- 
ceed William Bull, Jr., resigned. Governor Glen raised 
the objection that they had no right to make such a 
choice, even in the midst of a session, without first 
obtaining his leave. He gave up the point, however, on 
being shown that the assembly proceeded in the same 
way, in 1744, when Bull succeeded Judge Wliitaker.^ 
The right of approbation soon became a mere formality. 
Lord Charles Greville Montagu tried to revive the ex- 
ecutive prerogative in 1773 by refusing to approve 
Speaker Rawlins Lowndes. The Commons asserted 
the right to choose their speaker and declined to make 
a new election. Neither side would yield and the assem- 
bly was dissolved before it had organized. Montagu 
left the province a few weeks later, the newly elected 
assembly again chose Mr. Lowndes for speaker, and he 
was approved by Lieutenant-Governor Bull.^ 

The choice of clerk was likewise a subject of con- 
troversy. Like the speaker, he was, before 1732, elected 
by the house. But there was this difference : the gov- 
ernor had to approve the speaker, but he merely admin- 
istered the state oaths to the clerk. In Januarj^, 1730, 
Mr. John Bayley, a member from Goose Creek, was 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXII, 299-300. 

Ubid., XXXIX, Part II, 1-6; Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 204-205. 



112 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

elected clerk and sent up to the president to take the 
necessary oaths. Middleton refused to qualify him, 
stating that he had good reasons, and that, if the house 
would choose another person more suitable, he would 
be glad to approve of him. His message was referred 
to a committee, which reported that they could find no 
precedents in their journals where a clerk had ever 
been sent to the governor for his approbation, and that 
the assembly had always chosen their own clerk and 
the governor had merely administered the oaths. To 
this Middleton replied that the governor always pos- 
sessed the right of approbation, and that the only 
reason it had not been exercised was because accept- 
able persons had hitherto been chosen. He added that 
Bayley was the only person in the province who was 
personally obnoxious to him. The assembly adhered 
to their position and the dispute waxed warm. Mid- 
dleton informed them that the clerk of the House of 
Commons in England was a patent officer and called 
attention to the fact that he was forbidden by the 
thirty-fifth article of the governor 's instruction to allow 
the assembly any powers or privileges not possessed 
by the Commons in England. The house then sent up 
messages on various subjects, but Middleton informed 
them that he would return no answers until they re- 
ceded from their choice of Bayley for clerk and pre- 
sented another for his approval. A deadlock resulted 
and the assembly was soon after dissolved.^ 

Governor Robert Johnson arrived in the prov- 
ince in December, 1730, and his first assembly was 

1 Council Journals, Ms., IV, 270-272, 274-280. 



THE LEGISLATURE 113 

convened on the 20tli of the following month. 
Bayley was again chosen clerk, but the result had 
barely been announced when a message was re- 
ceived from the governor asking the house to recom- 
mend a suitable person for the i3lace and saying that 
he would appoint him according to his instructions. 
They replied that they had already chosen their clerk and 
their messenger according to the usual custom, and that 
they would send them up to take the state oaths. John- 
son retorted that the undoubted right of appointment 
was vested in the governor as His Majesty's represen- 
tative ; that he could not allow them to choose their clerk, 
though they might choose their messenger, as he believed 
that the House of Commons in England had this privi- 
lege; and, finally, that he intended to make the royal 
instructions the rule of his government. In answer to 
a demand of the house for his instructions on the sub- 
ject, he sent down a copy of the thirty-fifth article of 
Governor Nicholson's instructions, and called atten- 
tion to the fact that it had been made a law of the pro- 
vince by the eleventh section of the election act of 1721. 
He used the same argument in regard to this instruc- 
tion as had already been advanced by Middleton. The 
assembly denied the argument and declared that they 
would not recede from a point wherein their privileges 
were so much concerned. 

Johnson now secured a personal audience with Bay- 
ley and offered him a clerk's commission. He went to 
the assembly for advice and they told him to act as he 
thought proper. He accepted the commission and His 
Excellency administered the state oaths. The house 



114 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

voted at once not to receive him as clerk by virtue of 
his commission. Bayley then resigned and surrendered 
his commission to the governor. The assembly elected 
Eleazar Allen to take his place. Johnson agreed, for 
the sake of harmony, to administer the oaths to Allen. 
He still maintained his right to appoint, however, and 
declared that he would submit the question to the king 
for final settlement. 

On December 8, 1732, His Excellency informed the 
house that he had received a warrant from the king un- 
der the royal sign manual commanding him to appoint 
Isaac Amyand to be their clerk, and that he had commis- 
sioned him and administered the state oaths. A com- 
mittee, appointed to consider the message, reported a 
number of precedents from Nicholson's administration 
to show that the right of the assembly to make their 
own choice had never been disputed. Johnson replied 
that he was determined to see the king's positive com- 
mands enforced, whatever the consequences might be. 
Seeing that they would be compelled to give up, the 
assembly began casting about for some method of retir- 
ing gracefully. One member produced a letter from 
New York which said that the governor of that province 
appointed the assembly's clerk, and another member 
announced that he had seen the like in the journals of 
the assemblies of the Jerseys. After thus looking up 
the precedents in true English fashion, they voted to 
receive Mr. Amyand as clerk.^ 

We have here recorded one of the very few victories 

> Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 608-616, 880, 882-883, 885- 
886. 



THE LEGISLATURE 115 

achieved by the prerogative party in their conflict with 
the people. During the remainder of the colonial 
period the clerk of the assembly was appointed by com- 
mission from the king or from his representative in the 
colony. After all, the victory was not so great as it 
might seem, for, being dependent upon the lower house 
for his salary, the clerk was really under their control. 

The other officers of the assembly— messenger, 
deputy messenger, and cashier— were all chosen freely 
by the house itself without any interference from the 
executive. 

The members of both houses served entirely without 
remuneration from the public purse. On December 11, 
1746, a bill was introduced into the assembly for the 
payment of members. The section providing for pay 
to councilors was first struck out and then the bill as a 
whole defeated by a vote of eighteen to eleven.* Lieu- 
tenant-Governor Bull, writing to the Earl of Hillsbor- 
ough in 1770, said that the members of the assembly 
disdained to take any pay for their services, though the 
members of the North Carolina and Virginia assemblies 
received eight or nine shillings sterling per day.^ 

The first attempt to change the election law of 1721 
was made in 1745. After a long dispute between the 
two houses, an act was passed. May 25, which slightly 
altered and amended the existing law. There were two 
questions on which the houses differed, one in regard to 
the extension of the franchise, and the other in regard 
to the manner of taking the qualification oath. The 
assembly wanted to extend the franchise and to allow 

1 Corn. House Journals, Ms., XXII, 239. 
'^Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 375. 



116 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

members to take the oath according to their profession, 
and not on the Holy Evangelists, as was then required. 
The council desired to restrict the franchise still further 
and to continue the practice of taking the oath on the 
Evangelists. On May 16, the house bill was amended by 
the council in accordance with their views. Mr. Charles 
Pinckney entered his protest on the journals and made 
a strong plea in favor of civil equality for Protestant 
Dissenters.^ The assembly adhered to their views and 
finally the matter was submitted to a conference com- 
mittee. The committee adopted the council 's views that 
the suffrage should be restricted to freeholders and that 
the old form of taking the oath should be retained. 
Strange to say, the lower house agreed to this settlement 
and the bill became a law. On the third reading in the 
council, Mr. Pinckney again entered his dissent and re- 
peated his plea for civil and religious equality.^ Among 
the more important clauses of this act was one which 
declared ineligible for election any person holding an 
office or place of profit in the province from which he 
received a salary raised by the general assembly, an- 
other which provided for annual instead of triennial 
elections, and a final clause repealing the sections of the 
act of 1721 covering these subjects.^ An additional act 
of March 12, 1748, repealed the annual clause and made 
elections biennial. It also provided that persons who 
had scruples against taking the oath on the Evangel- 
ists might make a simple affirmation instead.^ 

1 Council Journals {Upper House), Ms., XIII, 189-193. 
^Ihid., 195-196, 218-219, 221-222, 232, 236. 
'Statutes, III, 656-658. 
* Ibid., 692-693. 



THE LEGISLATUKE 117 

These two acts were sent to England and in time came 
before the Board of Trade. They wrote to Governor 
Glen, June, 1748, that they had advised the king to 
repeal the law of 1745 because it limited the life of the 
assembly to one year, because it excluded persons hold- 
ing places of trust or profit from sitting in the assembly, 
and, finally, because it repealed certain clauses of the 
law of 1721 and hence ought not to have been passed 
without a suspending clause, as required in the gov- 
ernor's instructions.^ The 1748 act was also disallowed 
by the king in council, October 31, 1751.^ 

The last effort at amendment was made in 1759. 
An additional act to the law of 1721 was passed April 7. 
Provision was again made for simple affirmation instead 
of an oath on the Evangelists, several clauses of the 
law of 1721 were repealed, and the 1748 law was de- 
clared repealed.-^ This act was also disapproved b}^ 
the king in council, because it repealed parts of the law 
of 1721 without good reasons being assigned and with- 
out a suspending clause, and also because it presumed 
to repeal the law of 1748,. which had already been dis- 
allowed by the crown.^ In spite of considerable com- 
plaint as to its looseness and deficiencies, the act of 
1721 remained the election law of South Carolina until 
the Revolution. 

^Public Records, Ms., XXIII, 127-128. 
2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 41. 
!> Statutes, IV, 98-101. 
* Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 41. 



CHAPTER III 

The Judiciaey 

In this chapter the following topics will be consid- 
ered in the order named: judicial powers of the gov- 
ernor and council, common law courts, the circuit court 
act of 1769, lower courts, admiralty court, and attempts 
to establish a court of exchequer. 

The reader should always bear in mind the fact that 
the Lords Proprietors and their successor, the king, 
claimed the sole right of establishing and regulating 
courts of justice, a claim which the lower house of the 
general assembly stoutly denied and which, with more 
or less success, they attempted to nullify. 

JUDICIAX, POWEES OF THE GOVERNOR AND CoUNCIL 

From the first settlement in 1670 practically all 
powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, were vested 
in the governor and council until a bench of judges 
was established in 1683 to attend to judicial business. 
The original common law jurisdiction, then taken away, 
was never restored. The following judicial powers, 
however, were still left or were conferred upon the gov- 
ernor and council at one time or another during the 
colonial period: they were authorized to sit as a high 
court of error to hear appeals in cases involving more 
than a certain amount— £100 sterling in 1721, £500 in 
1770— though this jurisdiction was rarely, if ever, exer- 

118 



THE JUDICIARY 119 

cised ; ^ they constituted a court of chancery ; and finally, 
the governor alone exercised the ecclesiastical jurisdic- 
tion of ordinary for granting marriage licenses, probate 
of wills, and administration of the estates of intestates. 
A court of chancery was established early in the pro- 
prietary period.^ The unsuccessful attempt of the 
revolutionary party in 1720 to deprive the governor and 
council of their chancery jurisdiction will be considered 
in another connection.^ An act of September 9, 1721, 
reorganized the court and put it upon a statutory basis. 
The governor and a majority of the council were 
authorized to hold the court and to exercise the powers 
thereof in as full and ample a manner as any chan- 
cellor or court of chancery in America. They were to 
hold formal meetings four times a year on the first 
Thursday after the court of common pleas met in 
Charleston and sit from day to day until all business 
was disposed of.^ As a result of this, the legislative and 
executive duties of the council were often interfered 
with. So a law of 1732 enacted that the court should 
always be open, and, whenever any case came up for 
hearing, the governor could call together the council 
and dispose of it.^ The provision that a majority of 
the council was necessary to constitute a court also gave 
trouble, as many of the councilors were often absent 

1 Public Records; Ms., VIII, 122, XXXII, 375. 

2 statutes, II, 19. 

* In the next topic on the common law courts. 

* Ihid., VII, 163-160. 

^Ibid., Ill, 324-325. This law was repealed in England because of 
certain other provisions not approved by the Board of Trade. The 
change in the time of meeting of the court was doubtless continued how- 



120 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

from the province. To remedy this, an act of February 
17, 1747, made a majority of those members actually in 
the province at any given time sufficient/ Though 
vested with the powers of His Majesty's High Court of 
Chancery in South Britain, this court proceeded only 
on the equity side, no officers whatever being appointed 
on the plea side to exercise what is called the ordinary 
jurisdiction of the court of chancery. Writs of scire 
facias, for example, were never issued.^ 

Common Law Courts 
On January 2, 1683, in accordance with an instruction 
from the proprietors. Governor Morton and the other 
proprietary deputies issued commissions to Robert 
Gribbes, sheriff, and Stephen Bull, Edward Middleton, 
Richard Conant, and Robert Daniel, assistant justices 
of Berkeley county. They were to attend to the judicial 
business of the entire province until the growth of 
population warranted the establishment of courts in 
the other counties.^ These officials were all laymen as 
there were no trained lawyers in the province at this 
time. The sheriff, like his old English predecessors, was 
a judicial as well as an executive officer, being both 
chief justice and sheriff of the court.^ An appellate 
jurisdiction was still reserved to the governor and 
council. 

1 statutes, VII, 191-193. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., X, 107-108. For the distinction between 
the ordinary and extraordinary jurisdiction of the court of chancery, 
see Spence, Equity Jurisdiction, I, 336-337; Kerly, History of Equity, 
49-50, 55-56. 

^Public Records, Ms., I, 139-140; Council Journals, Ms., I, 63-64. 
* Rivers, Sketch of the Hist, of S. Car., 434. 



THE JUDICIARY 121 

As the records for these early years are rather frag- 
mentary, it is difficult to follow the history of this court. 
The assistant judges probably dropped out of the sys- 
tem in a short time, at least by 1698, one chief judge 
being sufficient for the needs of the province. He was, 
as we have seen, appointed by the governor and council 
as sheriff or judge of Berkeley county and was given 
only a temporary jurisdiction over the rest of the pro- 
vince until separate county courts were established. 
The first regular chief justice of the whole province 
was Mr. Edmund Bohun, commissioned by the Lords 
Proprietors, May 22, 1698, at a salary of £60 a year.^ 
Between 1698 and 1719 the office was held by Bohun, 
James Moore, Nicholas Trott, Eobert Gibbes, and 
Nicholas Trott, in the order named.^ 

It is difficult to fix upon an exact date for the origin 
of the two common law courts. The judges appointed 
in 1683 heard both civil and criminal cases, probably 
holding separate sessions for each. As early as 1692, 
mention is made of the court of pleas, and in 1701 an 
act was passed providing that the court of general ses- 
sions of the peace and general gaol delivery should be 
held twice a year, both references implying that the 
courts were already in existence under these names.^ 

These courts doubtless followed the common law pro- 
cedure, although the common law was not formally 
adopted in the province by statute until 1712. An 
act, ratified December 12 of that year, put in force one 

1 S. Car. Hist. Soc. Col, I, 145. 

2 McCrady, S. Car. under Prop. Govt., 721. 

» Rivers, Sketch of the Hist, of 8. Car., Appendix, 434; Statutes, II, 
166-167. 



122 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

hundred and sixty-seven selected English statutes, ex- 
tending from Magna Charta to the eighth of Anne, 
chapter 17, and declared that the entire common law 
of England with certain restrictions and limitations 
was to be in force. Courts of record in the province 
were to have all the powers and privileges conferred 
upon the king 's courts by the above mentioned statutes.^ 

From this time until the fall of the proprietary gov- 
ernment practically the entire judicial business of the 
province was in the hands of one man. Chief Justice 
Nicholas Trott was sole judge of the courts of common 
pleas and general sessions, judge of the vice-admiralty 
court after 1716, and, as a councilor, a member of the 
court of chancery and of the highest appellate court in 
the province. His abuse of these vast powers was one 
of the chief causes of the revolution of 1719. Conse- 
quently, when the revolutionary party came into power, 
one of their first acts was to pass a law for regulating 
the courts of justice, ratified Febniary 12, 1720.^ This 
is the first statute which deals to any extent with the 
constitution and procedure of the courts. Previous to 
this time, their establishment and regulation had been 
regarded as essentially a prerogative of the proprietors. 
The common law courts and the court of chancery were 
all considered and the governor and council were prac- 
tically shorn of judicial powers. 

The common law courts were to consist of a chief jus- 

i statutes, II, 401-508. 

2 Ibid., Ill, 99. Title only. The original act is now lost, but a copy 
made in 1749 is preserved in the British Public Record Office. Through 
the kindness of the officials of that office I -have been able to secure a 
copy. 



THE JUDICIARY 123 

tice and not exceeding five assistants, commissioned by 
the crown, though vacancies were to be filled by the 
governor and council until His Majesty's pleasure could 
be known. Inasmuch as Trott had been removed and 
there had been no assistant judges since 1698 at the lat- 
est, the entire bench had to be filled temporarily by the 
governor and council. Richard Allein was appointed 
chief justice, with perhaps five assistants. On June 2, 
1721, four days after Governor Nicholson arrived in the 
province, Allein was succeeded by Francis Yonge, and 
a new bench of assistants was appointed, consisting of 
Charles Hill, John Fenwicke, Samuel Eveleigh, Wil- 
liam Dry, and Alexander Parris.^ 

The ninth section stated that governors had arbi- 
trarily committed men to prison because of private 
grudges, and, having the power to remove judges and 
revoke the licenses of lawyers, had disregarded the ha- 
beas corpus act. Hence it was enacted that no judge 
could be suspended or removed by the governor on any 
pretence whatsoever, and licenses to lawyers were to be 
issued and revoked only by the judges or chancellor 
under whom they pleaded. 

The governor and council as a court of chancery were 
done away with and they were authorized to appoint a 
chancellor, who was to hold a court of chancery, with 
the same powers and jurisdiction exercised by other 
similar courts in America, except in the matter of ap- 
peals and writs of error. He could be suspended or 
removed only by the king. 

Section four called attention to the abuse of appeal- 

^ Pullic Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 15. 



124 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

ing from the decisions of the common law courts to a 
court of equity or to the governor in council, and from 
the decrees of the chancery court to the governor in 
council. It was enacted that all writs of error and ap- 
peals and all injunctions or orders of restraint issued by 
the governor or governor in council for re-examining 
suits or staying proceedings should be ipso facto null 
and void. If the defendant had an equitable remedy in 
view, he was to seek the same in a court of equity before 
the chancellor and not before the governor in council, 
and, except in extraordinary cases, must do so before a 
verdict in law was reached. Injunctions for staying 
suits were not to be granted of course or by surprise, 
but a bill had to be filed and timely notice given to the 
other party in writing. Furthermore, the complainant 
was required to take oath that he believed the allega- 
tions set forth in his bill to be true. 

The court was to be always open for the dispatch of 
such cases, while full and solemn hearings were to be 
held six times a year, beginning on the first Tuesdays 
in January, April, June, July, September, and Novem- 
ber. The registrar and master in chancery, though 
appointed by the governor and council, could, like the 
judges and chancellor, be removed only by His Majesty. 

Perhaps the most significant encroachment upon the 
royal prerogative is to be found in section seven, which 
provided that the governor, council, and assembly should 
constitute a court to hear appeals from the common law 
and chancery courts in cases involving more than £100 
sterling. Appeal had to be made within fourteen days 
after the judgment or decree was rendered, if the assem- 



THE JUDICIARY 125 

bly were in session; otherwise, within fourteen days 
after the assembly met. Where more than £500 was in- 
volved, appeals might be made to the king, provided 
ample security were given to meet the expenses of the 
case. 

This law, as we have seen, was passed just after the 
overthrow of the proprietary government and while the 
people were still in a frenzy over the arbitrary conduct 
of Judge Trott. Its most radical features were buried 
beneath the wave of loyalty which followed Governor 
Nicholson's arrival. The governor and council regained 
their chancery and appellate jurisdictions with undi- 
minished powers. True, a bench of assistant judges 
was appointed, but it is at least doubtful whether their 
commissions are based upon the law. The question of 
tenure does not seem to have arisen until 1749. In that 
year an assistant judge denied the right of Governor 
Glen to susj^end him from office and cited this act 
in defense of his position. Glen laid the whole matter 
before the Board of Trade together with a copy of the 
law.^ After hearing a report from their special counsel, 
Mr. Matthew Lamb, the board gave an opinion, October 
26, 1750, that the law of 1720 was null and void, having 
been passed by a revolutionary body and never ratified 
by either the proprietors or the crown.^ 

So far as they were regulated by statute at all, rather 
than by instructions from the crown, the courts pro- 
ceeded until 1731 under this law and another of 1727,^ 

1 This is the copy still preserved in the Public Record Office. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXIII, 432-434, XXIV, 4-5, 34-35, 169. 

3 Statutes, III, 273. Title only. 



126 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

whicli is now lost. The act of 1727 was repealed by the 
queen in council, July 21, 1732, because it altered the 
first process in civil actions from a summons left at a 
man's house to a capias, which had to be personally 
served. The merchants complained that the frequent 
absence of the inhabitants in their trade with the In- 
dians and the distance that they lived from Charleston 
made it very inconvenient to serve personal summons 
and hence difficult for them to collect their debts.^ 

During the period of anarchy from 1727 to 1731 the 
jury list was exhausted and the courts had to be closed. ^ 
One of the first laws passed after Governor Johnson's 
arrival was ''An Act confirming and establishing the 
ancient and approved method of drawing Juries by 
ballot, in this province, and for the better administra- 
tion of justice in criminal causes, and for appointing 
of Special Courts for the trial of the causes of transient 
persons, declaring the power of the Provost Marshal, 
for allowing the proof of deeds beyond the seas as evi- 
dence, and for repealing the several Acts of the General 
Assembly therein mentioned, ' ' ratified August 20, 1731.^ 
All previous acts on the subject were repealed and this 
remained the jury law until after the Revolution. 

Three jury lists were made up every three years. 
From one list, composed of those who paid more than 
five pounds currency in taxes, were drawn the grand 
jurors ; from another, composed of those who paid more 
than twenty shillings, the petit jurors; and from the 

1 Public Records, Ms., XIV, 279-280, XV, 139-140. 

2 Ibid., XV, 37. 

3 Statutes, III, 274-287. 



THE JUDICIAEY 127 

third, composed of the taxpayers of Charleston, jurors 
for special meetings of the court of common pleas and 
for inquests of various kinds. The order of service in 
each list was determined by lot. Members of the coun- 
cil and assembly, judges and officers of the courts of 
justice, and all persons excepted by the laws of Great 
Britain were exempted from jury duty. 

Section thirty of this law enacted that *' henceforth 
there shall be erected, established, and holden in Charles- 
ton, in this province, a court of record by the name and 
stile of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace, Oyer 
and Terminer, Assize and General Gaol Deliveiy, and 
the said court shall always hereafter be holden before 
the Chief Justice of this Province for the time being, 
and two or more assistant judges, to be commissioned 
for that purpose by His Majesty, his heirs or successors, 
or by the Governor and Commander in Chief of this 
Province for the time being." This court was to have 
all the powers, jurisdictions, and authorities possessed 
by the courts of king's bench, assizes, oyer and terminer, 
or any court of general and quarter sessions of the peace 
in Great Britain. Two sessions were to be held each 
year, in March and October.' In the absence of the 
assistant judges, the chief justice was empowered to 
hold court the same as though they were present. 

One very important innovation in criminal procedure 
was made by this law. It seems the most natural thing 
in the world to us that a criminal should have the benefit 
of counsel. At that time, however, such a thing was 

1 The number of meetings was increased to three per annum in 1767. 
Statutes, VII, 194-197. 



128 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

almost unheard of anywhere. It was not until 1836 
that prisoners in felony cases were allowed counsel in 
England,^ This South Carolina statute of 1731, how- 
ever, provided that every person accused and indicted 
for high treason, petit treason, murder, felony, or other 
capital offense whatsoever should have a copy of the 
indictment against him, be allowed to make his defense 
through counsel learned in the law, and produce proof 
by lawful witness or witnesses. On the request of the 
prisoner, the judge of the court was required to assign 
one or two persons to defend him. The reason ad- 
vanced for this was that the judges of the several courts, 
who ought to assist prisoners in matters of law, could 
not be presumed to have as great knowledge and ex- 
perience as the judges at Westminster.^ In a letter to 
the Earl of Hillsborough in 1770, Lieutenant-Governor 
Bull stated that counsel was allowed to defend crim- 
inals not only in matters of law but generally.^ 

An act of February 26, 1732, provided that the court 
of common pleas should meet as usual four times a year 
on the second Tuesdays in February, May, August, and 
November. Two or more assistant judges were to be 
appointed and commissioned by the king or his gov- 
ernor. The chief justice was empowered to act in their 

^statutes at Large, 6 and 7 William IV, chap. 114. Laws of 1695 
and 1747 allowed persons charged with treason the benefit of counsel 
under certain restrictions. Counsel was also permitted in misdemeanor 
cases. In this connection see Bishop, New Criminal Procedure, Fourth 
Ed., I, 14, 296-298; Sharswood, Blackstone, II, 354-356; Rex vs. White, 
3 Campbell, 98; Rex vs. Perkins, 1 Ryan and Moody, 166; 7 William 
III, chap. 3; 20 George II, chap. 30. 

2 Statutes, III, 286. 

^Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 377-378. 



THE JUDICIARY 129 

absence, and any one of tliem could in his absence ad- 
journ court from day to day until he arrived/ The 
chief justice had sat alone since Governor Johnson's 
arrival in the province, no assistants having been ap- 
pointed under the act of 1731.'^ 

By an act of April 9, 1734, the assistants were given 
an equal voice with the chief justice. In the event of 
his absence or withdrawal from the court on the day 
appointed for the meeting, any three or more of them 
were authorized to sit and hold court just as though he 
were present.^ 

The reasons for this attack on the power of the chief 
justice are to be found in a study of the land system. 
In that connection something has already been said of 
the arrest of Dr. Thomas Cooper and of how Chief 
Justice Wright incurred the anger of the land specu- 
lators by his able defense of the privileges of the writ 
of habeas corpus. It was these speculators who secured 
the passage of the above mentioned act and induced 
Governor Johnson to remove Assistant Judge Cooper 
and appoint Thomas Dale in his place. Thomas 
Lamboll, another friend of the governor's was ap- 
pointed to succeed Daniel Green, who had gone to 
England for his health.* 

1 statutes, III, 323-326. On account of the summer heat, a law of 
1734 changed the August and November meetings to October and De- 
cember respectively. Ibid., VII, 186. 

Public Records, Ms., XVII, 268-269. It must be remembered that 
both of the common law courts were presided over by the same set of 
judges. 

3 Statutes, VII, 184-189. 

< Public Records, Ms., XVI, 309-311, 328-329. 

9 



130 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

Wright and his friends petitioned the king to disallow 
both the act of 1732 and that of 1734, alleging that, as 
the subordinate justices could override the chief, the 
judiciary of the province was at the mercy of the gov- 
ernor and assembly.^ The whole question was argued 
before the Board of Trade and the Lords of the Treas- 
ury. Both laws were repealed by the king, August 14, 
1735, on the ground that they empowered and required 
the governor to appoint assistant judges, which was a 
manifest encroachment upon the royal prerogative. An 
additional instruction was sent ont to Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Broughton saying that, as it was best for the 
welfare of the province that there should be assistant 
judges, the king was pleased to direct him to appoint 
two of them in each court in the province with equal 
powers in the dispensation of justice with the chief 
justice, in the same manner as was practiced by the 
puisne judges in similar courts in England.^ An act 
of 1740 empowered a majority of the assistant justices 
to hold the court of general sessions and try all crim- 
inal cases during the absence of the chief justice the 
same as when he was present.^ 

The court of common pleas was finally placed on a 
statutory basis by an act of March 5, 1737, just as the 
court of general sessions had been by the act of 1731. 
The court was to meet four times a year, in February, 
May, August, and November and was to exercise all of 

1 PuiUc Records, Ms., XVL 309-312, XVII, 268-270. 

2 Ibid., 366-367; Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 112. 
'Statutes, III, 555. 



THE JUDICIAEY 131 

the powers of the court of common pleas at West- 
minster.^ 

The two common law courts continued as thus organ- 
ized until the Revolution, though in 1772 their juris- 
diction was limited to a single district of which Charles- 
ton was the center. The chief justice, as a rule, was 
the only trained lawyer on the bench.^ He attended to 
nearly all the business of the court, and during most 
of the time there were no assistant judges in commis- 
sion at all. Thus, Eobert Pringle was the only assist- 
ant when the struggle over the use of stamped paper 
in the courts began in 1766. It was through Lieutenant- 
Governor Bull's appointment of Rawlins Lowndes, 
Benjamin Smith and Daniel Doyley to seats on the 
bench that the people were able to outwit Chief Justice 
Skinner.^ 

Before taking up the consideration of the circuit 
court acts of 1768 and 1769, the reader's attention 
should be called to a very important document in the 
judicial history of South Carolina. This is a letter of 
February 3, 1742, from Chief Justice Whitaker to 
Henry McCulloh, His Majesty's superintendent of the 
quit rents, in response to a request for an opinion on 
the jurisdiction of the law courts.^ After declaring 
that the courts of chancery, general sessions, and com- 
mon pleas had been established by acts of the general 

1 statutes, VII, 189-191. 

2 Charles Skinner, appointed chief justice in 1762, seems to have 
had no legal training whatever, but he was an exception. 

'For a fuller discussion of this subject see the final chapter, "The 
Downfall of Royal Government." 

* Council Journals, Ms., X, 102-112. 



132 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

assembly in derogation of His Majesty 's royal preroga- 
tive,^ lie proceeded to discuss their powers and juris- 
diction, giving some very valuable information, espe- 
cially in regard to the chancery court. By all odds the 
most important part of the letter, however, is that in 
which he suggests that the law courts should pass upon 
the constitutionality of acts of the general assembly. 
His argument was as follows: All acts of the general 
assembly were made by virtue of authority derived 
from the crown and must not be contrary to the king's 
instructions and the prerogative of the crown or re- 
pugnant to the laws of England. But, many such laws 
had been passed in all the colonies. "The question is 
whether these laws are void when they are first made, 
or only voidable by His Majesty's disallowance and 
may be put in practice till His Majesty 's pleasure shall 
be signified that the same are repealed. And whether 
the Judges of the Courts when they are given in Evi- 
dence or pleaded in Cases depending before them, ought 
to judge them ipso facto void, or only voidable and so 
to be put in practice till they are rejDealed by His 
Majesty."^ This is, I believe, the earliest suggestion 
ever made that a law court should declare an act of the 
legislature void because contrary to a written constitu- 
tion. The king in council, to be sure, had often repealed 
colonial statutes on the ground that they were repugnant 
to the laws of England, but the exercise of such a func- 

1 Established in the sense that their constitution and powers were 
regulated by the acts of 1721, 1731 and 1737, though all three existed 
long before the earliest of these dates. 

^Council Jovrtials, Ms., X, 110. 



THE JUDICIAEY 133 

tion was clearly legislative rather than judicial in char- 
acter.^ 

The Circuit Court Act of 1769 

The two common law courts at Charleston, together 
with the courts of justices of the peace for the trial of 
petty cases, amply served the needs of the province 
during the earlier years of its existence. As the settle- 
ments gradually extended further and further away 
from the coast, however, it became burdensome for the 
peojjle to travel one hundred and fifty or two hundred 
miles to Charleston to attend court. The matter became 
still more serious when the Scotch-Irish, after Brad- 
dock's defeat in 1755, poured into the upper part of 
the province from the colonies to the northward. They 
were a law-abiding people and had little need for courts 
of justice, until the peace of 1763 and the consequent 
disbanding of the British and French armies let loose 
a hoard of worthless vagabonds among them.^ The 
government at Charleston was helpless to preserve 
order, especially as the settlers refused to go down 
there for jury or witness sei*vice. The better class of 
frontiersmen demanded that courts should be estab- 
lished in their midst and determined to take the law 
into their own hands until this was done. A kind of 
law and order league, known as the Kegulators, was 
organized for the purpose of inflicting summary pun- 
ishment on criminals of all descriptions. The govern- 

1 In this connection see Brinton Coxe, Judicial Power and Uncon- 
stitutional Legislation, Chap. XX, especially the sections dealing with 
the case of Winthrop vs. Lechmere, 208-213, 370-382. 

2McCrady, 8. Car. under Royal Government, 312, 624-625. 



134 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

ment finally realized the seriousness of the situation 
and took ste23s to provide a system of circuit courts for 
the entire province. 

The principal obstacle to this course was that it would 
lessen the fees of the provost marshal of the province. 
The patent for this office had been held since 1759 by 
Eichard Cumberland, the English dramatist, who exer- 
cised his official duties through deputies and received a 
large share of the financial returns. Mr. Roger Pinck- 
ney, his deputy in the province, informed a committee 
of the assembly in December, 1766, that Cumberland 
was inclined to sell his patent. The committee of cor- 
respondence was ordered to write to Mr. Garth, the col- 
ony agent in England, and authorize him to treat with 
Cumberland for any sum not exceeding £4,000 sterling.^ 
While anarchy and lynch law were becoming the order 
of the day in upper South Carolina, Garth and Cumber- 
land were in England higgling over the compensation 
to be paid for the loss of the office of provost marshal. 
Cumberland refused to sell for less than £5,000 sterling. 
Finally, on November 11, 1767, the assembly resolved 
to pay this sum and authorized Garth to close the bar- 
gain.- 

*' An Act for establishing Courts, building Gaols, and 
appointing Sheriffs and other officers for the more con- 
venient administration of Justice in this Province ' ' soon 
passed the council and assembly and was ratified by the 
governor, April 12, 1768. The entire province was di- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, 238-239. 

2 Ibid., 469, 474. See Schaper, Sectionalism and Representation in 
S. Car., Annual Report of Amer. Hist. Association, 1900, Vol. I, 337-338. 



THE JUDICIARY 135 

vided into seven judicial districts, each named for the 
town in which the court was to meet : Charleston, Beau- 
fort, Orangeburgh, Georgetown, Camden, Cheraws, and 
Ninety-Six.^ The courts of general sessions and com- 
mon pleas were still to sit at Charleston three and four 
times per annum respectively, but their jurisdiction 
was restricted to the Charleston district. Circuits for 
the trials of all cases, civil and criminal, were to be held 
in the other districts in April and November of each 
year. The chief justice of the province and the assistant 
justices of the common law courts at Charleston were 
to be judges in all the courts. They were given power to 
decide without jury disputes involving less than twenty 
pounds sterling, except when land titles came into 
question, when both parties demanded a jury, or when 
one party demanded it and paid the expenses. The office 
of provost marshal was abolished and provision made 
for a sheriff in each district, who was to be appointed 
by the governor from a list of three selected by the 
judges of the court of common pleas. Whenever the 
king should be pleased to appoint judges during good 
behavior they were to receive the following salaries : the 
chief justice £500 sterling, and the assistant justices 
£300 sterling each per annum; the attorney-general 
and the clerk of the common pleas then in office were 
allowed £200 and £300 respectively. The act was not to 
go into effect until approved by the crown, nor were 
the courts to be opened for business until all the court 
houses and gaols had been completed.^ 

' A map showing these divisions will be found in Carroll, Hist. Col. 
of 8. Car., I, frontispiece. 
2 Statutes, VII, 197-205. 



136 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

The necessity of waiting for the king 's approbation of 
the law before putting it into operation gave rise to 
another long delay. The Board of Trade referred it to 
their special counsel, Mr. Matthew Lamb, who brought 
up a number of objections. First, he criticised the 
clause which allowed judges in the circuit courts to 
determine summarily cases involving not more than 
twenty pounds sterling. This sum was too large, he de- 
clared, objections having been made in other colonies 
when a much lower limit was fixed. Secondly, the aboli- 
tion of an office held under patent from the crown was 
an encroachment on the royal prerogative.^ Thirdly, 
the clause providing salaries for the judges whenever 
the king should be pleased to appoint them during good 
behavior was derogatory to His Majesty's dignity. 
Fourthly, the salaries provided for the attorney-general 
and the clerk were only for the present officers, and did 
not extend to the future.^ 

The Lords of Trade in their report to the king, made 
September 15, 1768, disregarded Lamb's first two ob- 
jections, laid considerable stress on the third and fourth, 
and added a fifth, namely, that the method of appoint- 
ing sheriffs took away the discretionary power of the 
governor and hence of the crown.^ The Lords of the 
Committee of the Privy Council agreed entirely with 
the objections of the Board of Trade, but the two main 

1 Lamb did not seem to know that the king, through the Earl of 
Shelburue, had already authorized the abolition of the office of provost 
marshal, provided proper compensation were made. Public Records, Ms., 
XXXII, 46. 

mid., 43-44. 

'Ibid., 44-50. 



THE JUDICIAKY 137 

objections, those concerning the tenure of judges and 
the appointment of sheriffs, seemed still stronger to 
them 'insomuch that they considered the first as inde- 
cent and disrespectful to His Majesty and the other as 
altogether inadmissible," His Majesty in council issued 
an order, October 7, 1768, rejecting the bill and forbid- 
ding the governor to give his assent to any similar act 
in the future until the two objections just noticed were 
obviated.^ 

Meanwhile the disturbances in the back settlements 
were increasing. Lieutenant-Governor Bull issued a 
proclamation, August 15, 1768, calling on all law-abid- 
ing citizens to help put down the riots.' The Regula- 
tors and their opponents, the Scovilites, threatened for 
a time to plunge the upper country into a bloody civil 
war.^ 

The assembly was dissolved November 19, 1768, be- 
cause of a quarrel with Governor Montagu over the 
Massachusetts circular letter of February 11. Although 
an election was held shortly afterwards, the new assem- 
bly was not allowed to meet for business until June 26 
of the following year. Montagu had just returned from 
an extensive tour of the back country. Consequently, 
in his opening speech, he dwelt upon the grievous con- 
dition of affairs in that section of the province, due to 
the lack of courts, and urged the assembly to take some 
steps to remedy the matter. At the same time he in- 
formed them that the circuit court act had been disap- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 51-53. 
2/8. Car. Gazette, No. 1715, August 15, 1768. 

' For an account of these troubles see McCrady, <S'. Car. under Royal 
Govt., 594-595, G34-638. 



138 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

proved in England and laid before them the report of 
the Board of Trade.^ 

Messrs. Lynch, Lowndes, Powell, Gaillard, Rutledge, 
Gadsden, and Kershaw, who had been appointed a 
committee to consider the question, reported, on July 
4, that a bill should be brought in similar to the other, 
but without the objectionable stipulation in regard 
to judges holding office during good behavior.^ Such 
a measure was at once passed through both houses 
and sent up to the governor. He refused to ratify 
it on the ground that only one of the objections of 
the Board of Trade had been disposed of. The as- 
sembly maintained that they had obviated the only 
objection upon which the board had laid any stress, 
but Governor Montagu stood firm in his opposition. A 
new bill was introduced, enacted into a law on July 
29, and was carried to England by the governor him- 
self.^ This act is not to be found at all in Cooper's 
collection of the statutes, though a mutilated form of 
it is given in Grimke.* It was, however, identical with 
the act of the preceding year, except in the clauses 
relating to the tenure of judges, the salaries of the 
clerk of the crown and the attorney-general, and the 
appointment of sheriffs. 

As soon as Governor Montagu arrived in London, he 
laid the act before the Board of Trade. A favorable 
report was received, and the king in council signified his 
approval on November 29. Lieutenant-Governor Bull 

lOoTO. House Journals, Ms., XXXVllI, 11. 

•^Ihid., 25. 29. 

3/6id., 29, 74-75, 76-78, 81, 93. 

* Grimke, Public Lairs of 8. Car., 268-273. 



THE JUDICIAKY 139 

was notified and was requested to send over a list of per- 
sons suitable to act as assistant judges.^ The evident 
intention was that the assistants should be selected from 
among the colonists, but, if so, the idea was soon aban- 
doned. We cannot be sure whether this change of 
policy was due to the refusal of the South Carolina 
lawyers to serve, to the unwillingness of the home gov- 
ernment to trust them, or to the pressure brought to 
bear by the spoilsmen in London. Perhaps all three 
causes had their effect. At any rate, the entire bench 
was appointed and sent out from England. It con- 
sisted at first of Thomas Knox Gordon, chief justice, 
and Edward Savage, Charles Matthews Coslett, John 
Murray, and John Fewtrell, assistant justices.' These 
men formed an addition to the ranks of the needy place- 
men, whose increasing numbers had already begun to 
arouse the animosity and weaken the loyalty of the 
people. South Carolina had some experience in carpet- 
bag government a century before the days of Recon- 
struction. 

The act of 1768 contained a clause, which was re- 
peated in that of 1769, providing that the law was 
not to go into operation until all the court-houses and 
gaols in the province were completed, although no 
appropriation for expenses or details in regard to the 
matter were inserted in either act. Bull informed the 
assembly, February 21, 1770, of His Majesty's ap- 
proval of the law, and urged them to take immediate 

I Public Records, Ms., XXXIl, 70-71, 113-117, 131. 
Ubid., XXXIII, 20-21, 40-41, 1.16. 



140 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PEOVINCE 

steps for erecting the necessaiy buildings/ A com- 
mittee report of March 7, 1770, presented plans for 
court-houses in the country districts to be built of 
wood, for gaols to be built of brick at Georgetown, 
Port Royal, and Orangeburgh, and of wood in the 
other districts, and for a brick gaol at Charleston. 
To meet the expenses of this work the issue of £50,000 
in paper money orders was recommended. The house 
agreed to the report with an amendment authorizing 
the issue of £70,000 instead of £50,000.' Accordingly, 
an act was passed, April 7, 1770, for issuing this 
amount in public orders, to be redeemed within five 
years from the funds arising under the general duty 
law.^ 

The work on the new buildings proceeded so slowly 
that the assistant judges complained to Lord Hills- 
borough, January 23, 1772, that it was being delayed 
on purpose to keep them out of their salaries, some of 
the popular leaders declaring that, as the law was not 
to be put into force until all the court-houses and gaols 
were completed, the salaries of the judges could not be- 
gin until that time.* In consequence of orders from 
the home government, the province was compelled to 
pay the judges and attorney-general their salaries in 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 273-275. 

2/6td., 305, 311-312. 

^Statutes, IV, 323-326. This act was disallowed by the king in 
council, January 15, 1772, on the ground that the clause which made 
the orders legal tender in payment of all duties and taxes was con- 
trary to the 4th George III, chap. 34. Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 
111-112. As the orders had already been issued and the work was 
far advanced, this repeal was disregarded. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 113-116. 



THE JUDICIARY 141 

full from February 19, 1770, the date on which Lieuten- 
ant-Governor Bull issued his proclamation announcing 
the confirmation by the king of the act relating to cir- 
cuit courts.^ 

A proclamation of May 19, 1772, announced that all 
of the court-houses and gaols had been completed and 
that the courts were to be opened at once.^ The six 
districts outside of Charleston were divided into two 
circuits, the southern including Orangeburgh, Ninety- 
Six, and Beaufort, and the northern including Camden, 
Cheraws, and Georgetown.'' 

Lower Courts 
There have been justices of the peace in South Caro- 
lina almost from the day on which the first settlement 
was made. In colonial times they were appointed 
under a general commission issued by the governor and 
council, and held during His Majesty's pleasure. A 
new commission, dated March 26, 1737, may be taken 
as a type. It appointed one hundred and one justices 
for Berkeley county, including the members of the 
council, members of the assembly residing in the county, 
the chief justice and assistant justices, various officials 
such as the secretary, attorney-general and master in 
chancery, and a number of other prominent men. 
Twenty were appointed for Colleton county, twenty- 
four for Craven, thirteen for Granville, and two for 
New Windsor (Fort Moore) and the parts adjacent.* 

^ Puilic Records, Ms., XXXII, 137-138; Com. House Journals, Ms., 
XXXIX, Part II, 69. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 69. 
'&'. Car. Gazette, No. 2035, March 27, 1775. 
*Ibid., No. 166, April 2, 1737. 



142 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Other similar conunissions were issued frora time to 
time and the nmnber of justices increased as the prov- 
ince became more thickly settled. 

Their powers and duties were determined by English 
tradition, provincial statutes, and instructions from the 
governor and council. One or more justices were em- 
powered to hear and decide in a summary manner all 
actions for debts not exceeding a certain amount, forty 
shillings sterling until 1727, and twenty pounds cur- 
rency, equal to about fifty-six shillings, after that date.^ 
They committed men to prison and released them on 
bail, issued warrants of the peace and warrants of hue 
and cry, administered oaths, took depositions, attested 
the returns of appraisements, and issued certificates 
for the heads of wild beasts, so that the owner could 
get his bounty. They also acted as toll masters, that 
is, took charge of stray live stock, advertised for the 
owners, and, if they were unclaimed, sold them for the 
benefit of the public and the informers.^ One justice 
and three freeholders sat as a court to determine the 
amount of damages arising from an abuse of riparian 
rights.^ 

An attempt was made in 1747 to establish courts for 
the trial of small debt cases similar to the courts of 
conscience or request in England, which Maitland de- 
fines as ''a body of unpaid commissioners, of local 
tradesmen or the like, empowered to adjudicate without 
jury upon very small debts. "^ By an act of June 13, 

1 statutes, II, 27-29, 47-49, 74-76, 598, III, 131-132, 268-269, 

2/6/(7,., II, 331-332, III, 603-606. 

"Ibid., Ill, 609. 

•• Justice and Police, 23. 



THE JUDICIARY 143 

1747, two justices and three freeholders, or a majority 
of them, were given power to determine in all actions 
for debt in which the amount in dispute exceeded twenty 
and was less than seventy-five pounds currency.^ This 
law promised to give relief to the settlers in the remote 
parts of the province, who were put to the trouble and 
expense of going down to Charleston every time they 
wished to sue for a debt exceeding twenty pounds cur- 
rency. It met with opposition in England, however, 
mainly because the fees of the provost marshal were 
reduced. As usual when there was a conflict between 
the interests of the people and the interests of a crown 
official, the latter came off victorious and the law was 
disallowed.^ 

Special courts for the trial of negro slaves were pro- 
vided for by an act of 1690. Any justice of the peace, 
on complaint being made to him, was authorized to issue 
a warrant for the arrest of the offending slave. He was 
then to call in another justice of the same county, and 
the two of them summoned three freeholders to com- 
plete the court, and appointed a day for the trial. Trial 
was without jury and the decision was final.' The pun- 
ishment meted out consisted in whipping, branding, cut- 
ting off the ears, or the infliction of the death penalty, 
according to the severity and frequency of the offense. * 

1 statutes, III, 701. Title only. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXIII, 5-7, 184, 185. Counsellor Lamb, it is 
true, advanced other objections in his report to the Board of Trade 
and declared that the private advantage of crown officials should not be 
allowed to interfere with the public welfare, but there can be no doubt 
that it did so interfere in this case as in many others. Chalmers, 
Colonial Opinions, 476-479. 

3 Statutes, VII, 345-347. 
*Ibid., 355, 374. 



144 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

With some changes in detail this method of trial con- 
tinued in South Carolina as long as slavery existed. By 
an act of June 7, 1712, the value of all slaves executed 
according to law was to be fixed by a disinterested board 
of appraisers and compensation made to the owners out 
of the public treasury.^ This proved too heavy a bur- 
den on the public ; so a law was passed in 1717 providing 
for a special tax upon the slaveholders of a parish when- 
ever a negro was executed within its limits.^ Such a 
localization of expense probably induced the courts to 
be too lenient in their treatijient of slave criminals. At 
all events, the old plan of compensation from the public 
treasury was restored after the Stono insurrection of 
1739.^ The presence of the entire court was required 
in capital cases, though the vote of one justice and two 
freeholders or of one freeholder and two justices was 
sufficient to convict. For minor offenses one justice 
and two freeholders were sufficient, and the concurrence 
of the justice and one freeholder enough to convict.* 

The slave code adopted in 1740 remained substan- 
tially unchanged until the Civil War. It provided that 
the court for the trial of capital offenses should consist 
of two justices and not more than five nor less than three 
freeholders. The most important innovation was the 

1 statutes, VII, 358. 

2 Ibid., 369. 

'^ Ibid., 403. A temporary change in form, but not in principle waa 
introduced in 1722 as a part of the attempt to establish the county 
system of local government. Tlie county and the judicial precinct 
established by the law of 1721 were substituted for the parish. Ibid., 
377. 

*Ibid., 366, 384, 400-401. 



THE JUDICIARY 145 

bringing of free negroes under the jurisdiction of the 
court/ 

Next in importance among the lower courts was that 
presided over by the coroner. Mention is made of such 
an official in Charleston as early as 1685,^ but no law 
dealing with the fees and duties of the office was passed 
until 1706. There were at that time several coroners in 
the province. Their principal duty, then, as now, was 
to hold inquests over the bodies of persons who met with 
sudden or violent deaths. Each coroner was required to 
make returns of all inquisitions taken before him to the 
next court of general sessions, and, upon the finding of 
a death by murder or homicide, to inform one or more 
of the justices of the peace for his county, so that the 
guilty party might be arrested and held for trial.^ They 
were appointed by the governor, except for a short 
period succeeding the year 1723, when the power of ap- 
pointment was vested in the justices of the newly- 
created county and precinct courts.* 

Mention of these courts suggests a brief considera- 
tion of the first serious attempt to furnish judicial facili- 
ties for the back settlers. ''An Act for establishing 
County and Precinct Courts," passed September 20, 
1721, provided for five courts of pleas, assize, and gaol 
delivery— one at Wassamsaw, in Berkeley county, for 
the parishes of St. James's Goose Creek, St. George's 
and St. John's; another at Echaw, in the parish of St. 
James 's Santee, for Craven county ; a third at Willtown 

1 statutes, VII, 397-417, 402; McCrady, S. Car. under Royal Govt., 
231. 

2 Statutes, II, 6. 
J /bid., 269-273. 
* Ibid., VII, 181. 

10 



146 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

for Colleton county ;^ a fourth at Beaufort for Granville 
county; and a fifth at or near the plantation of Louis 
Dutarque in Berkeley county, to be called Wando pre- 
cinct, for the parishes of St. Thomas's, St. Dennis's, 
and Christ Church. Actions in Berkeley county outside 
of Wassamsaw and Wando precincts were to be tried at 
the general court in Charleston. The courts were mod- 
eled after the English courts of quarter sessions. Five 
judges, commissioned by the governor from among the 
magistrates of the respective counties and precincts, 
were placed over each court. Three constituted a quo- 
rum for business. Courts were to be held in each pre- 
cinct or county four times a year and were to have juris- 
diction over all criminal cases not extending to life or 
limb and civil cases involving not more than one hun- 
dred pounds sterling. Under certain restrictions, ap- 
peals in civil cases were allowed to the general court at 
Charleston. Like our boards of county commissioners 
and supervisors, the judges constituted the county or 
precinct authority and attended to a number of admin- 
istrative duties. Thus they were empowered to punish 
obstinate servants, to license taverns, to bring suit for 
legacies left for public purposes, to take charge of the 
estates of orphans, to inspect the accounts of church 
wardens and overseers of the poor, to lay out and repair 
roads, to build court houses and gaols, and to levy taxes 
to pay for the same.^ 

Considerable hardship was caused by the provision in 
this law for the trial of cases either in the county or pre- 

1 The people on John's Island were subject to the courts at Charleston. 
!i Statutes, II, 166-176. 



THE JUDICIARY 147 

cinct in which the defendant lived or in tliat in which he 
was arrested. Settlers on going down to Charleston to 
market were often seized on debt charges and thrown 
into prison. The evil was remedied by an additional 
act of February 23, 1723, requiring that the trial should 
be held in the defendant's own county or precinct. 
Semi-annual were substituted for quarterly sessions of 
the court, as it was found that all business could be at- 
tended to in the two meetings.' 

The system was a trifle too elaborate for the existing 
needs of the province. It was suggested in a committee 
report of November 5, 1725, that three courts were am- 
ply sufficient and a recommendation was made that the 
plaintiff should be allowed to take out his writ either 
from his own precinct court or from the general court at 
Charleston. ' By 1731 several of these courts had fallen 
into disuse and nearly all cases were again being tried 
in Charleston.^ It was not a great while before they 
dropped out of the system entirely. The chief difficulty 
seems to have been the lack of legal training among the 
judges. 

The Admiealty Court 

Previous to 1697, there was no court of admiralty in 
the province, maritime cases being tried before the com- 
mon law courts.* Frequent complaints were made by 
the king's collectors of the customs that the common 

^statutes, II, 178-183. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., Ill, 167. 

» Statutes, III, 287-288. 

* Commissions, to be sure, were issued in 1685 and from time to 
time thereafter for the trial of pirates; but they did not constitute ad- 
miralty courts in the strictest sense of the term. Ihid., II, 7-9, 25-27. 



148 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

law judges would not give the proper assistance in 
enforcing the acts of trade and navigation.^ Finally, 
in 1696, owing chiefly to the representations of Edward 
Eandolph, the English government announced its in- 
tention of establishing admiralty courts in all of the 
colonies.' The proprietors of the Bahamas, Carolinas, 
Pennsylvania, and the Jerseys, and the agent of Con- 
necticut sent a memorial to the Board of Trade, De- 
cember 16, 1696, stating that they had not yet erected 
admiralty courts because it would be an expensive 
proceeding and because breaches of the navigation acts 
could, by the 15tli Charles II, be tried in the common 
law courts. However, they declared that they were 
willing to establish such courts and to do all in their 
power to enforce the navigation laws.^ 

The question at issue now was whether the English 
government or the proprietors should establish and reg- 
ulate the courts. The Board of Trade settled the ques- 
tion, so far as South Carolina was concerned, by erect- 
ing a court of vice-admiralty in Charleston in 1697 with 
Joseph Morton as judge, Thomas Carey register, J. 
Amory advocate, and E. Pollinger marshal.* These 
officials and their successors until the time of the Revo- 
lution were appointed by the admiralty board in 
England, usually, before 1719, upon the recommenda- 
tion of the Lords Proprietors.^ 

1 Public Records, Ms., II, 223-224. 

2 Randolph Papers in Prince Society Publications, Vol. XVI, Part 
V, 31-35, 117-124, 130-132. 

3 New Jersey Archives, First Series, II, 133-134. 
* 8. Car. His. Soc. Col., I, 207. 

5 Public Records, Ms., V, 2G3, 266. 



THE JUDICIAEY 149 

In order to enforce the revenue laws more strictly, 
parliament passed an act in 1764 providing for a court 
of vice-admiralty over all America, with headquarters 
at Halifax. The Earl of Northumberland was appointed 
vice-admiral and William Spry judge. Opened October 
9, 1764, this court met with opposition throughout all 
the colonies and accomplished very little.' A sugges- 
tion was made a year later that it should be removed 
to Boston, but this was probably not carried into effect. ^ 

In 1768 a more elaborate scheme was proposed. On 
July 6 of that year, His Majesty in council ordered the 
erection of four vice-admiralty courts in America: one 
at Halifax, for Quebec, Newfoundland, and Nova Scotia ; 
another at Boston, for New Hampshire, Massachusetts 
Bay, Rhode Island, and Connecticut; a third at Phila- 
delphia, for New York, Pennsylvania, the lower counties 
on the Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia ; and a fourth 
at Charleston, for North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Georgia, East Florida, and West Florida. The court 
at Charleston was to have jurisdiction over all cases 
arising from the capture of ships south of 36° 45' north 
latitude or of ships bound for some port in the district. 
It was given appellate jurisdiction over the courts of 
vice-admiralty established or to be established in any 
of the colonies of the district.^ 

Sir Augustus Johnson, who was appointed judge for 

1 Cliarles W. Tuttle in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceedings, First Series, 
XVII, 291-293. 

2 Washburn, Judicial Hist, of Mass., 175; ]Ve«7 Jersey Archives, First 
Series, IX, 620-621. See Whitney, Govt, of the Colony of 8. Car., 
Johns Hopkins University Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, XIII, 88-89. 

'i Public Records, Ms., XXXVI, 219-227. 



150 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

the southern district, arrived in Charleston in May, 
1769/ but there is no indication that any serious attempt 
was ever made to put the system into operation. Conse- 
quently, the only court of vice-admiralty in the province 
was that established in 1697. The court records from 
1716 to 1763, with the exception of a hiatus from 1749 
to 1752, are preserved in the office of the clerk of the 
United States District Court at Charleston.^ 

For the sake of convenience, the powers and jurisdic- 
tion of the court may be considered under the following 
topics: piracy, treason, felony, and murder; acts of 
trade and navigation; maritime cases in general; and 
prize cases. 

Previous to the reign of Henry VIII, piracy was a 
felony only by the civil law and was not at all cog- 
nizable by the common law. The civil law, which fur- 
nished the rules of procedure in the admiralty courts, 
would not allow a man to be condemned to death unless 
he confessed the crime or was convicted on the testi- 
mony of eye witnesses. Many notorious offenders thus 
escaped punishment entirely. To remedy this defect, 
the act of 28 Henry VIII, chapter 15 (1536), took piracy 
cases out of the courts of admiralty and provided for 
jury trials before a special commission selected by the 
lord chancellor and not restricted by the civil law pro- 
cedure.^ South Carolina adopted this method of trial 
as early as 1685, although the English law on the sub- 

i Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 76; S. Car. Gazette, No. 1760, June 
15, 1769. 

2 These records are bound in three large folio volumes, the first 
designated as A and B, the second as C and D, and the third as E and F. 
The pages are not numbered in the first two volumes. 

3 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 511-512. 



THE JUDICIARY 151 

ject was not formally declared in force until 1712, when 
it was included among the large number of statutes 
adopted at that time. The act of 1712 also conferred 
ujjon the governor and council all the powers of the 
lord chancellor of England or of the lord keeper of the 
seals in the execution of these statutes. Consequently, 
the governor and council selected the persons to serve 
on the various commissions from time to time, though 
the commissions themselves were made out in the name 
of the Lords Proprietors and later of the king. One 
commission, dated November 27, 1716, is directed to 
Nicholas Trott, judge of the admiralty, and ten assist- 
ants, of whom there were four ship captains, a member 
of the council, the speaker of the assembly, two mer- 
chants, and two other persons. Attention is called to the 
act of 28 Henry VIII against piracy, especially to the 
clause providing that all treasons, felonies, robberies, 
and murders committed on the high seas or in any ports 
should be tried the same as if committed on land. The 
commission then went on to confer upon Trott and any 
three assistants as full powers as any commissioners in 
England might have.^ 

Not only piracy, but cases of murder, robbery, and 
felony on the high seas were to be tried before the com- 
mission. There were several trials for piracy held be- 
tween 1716 and 1719. The procedure was about as 
follows: A grand jury, containing from thirteen to 
twenty-three members, was first sworn in; the advo- 
cate-general then presented indictments against the sus- 

1 Admiralty Court Records, Ms., A and B. 



152 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

pected parties; in ease a true bill was found and the 
defendants pleaded not guilty, they were brought before 
a petty jury for trial, and their decision was final.^ 

This commission did not in the proper sense consti- 
tute an admiralty court, though it was presided over by 
the judge of the vice-admiralty and its proceedings are 
given in the admiralty court records. Trial was always 
by jury and according to the common law, while the 
admiralty court proper proceeded without a jury and 
according to the civil law. It was sometimes desig- 
nated as "the royal commission for holding admiralty 
sessions. ' ' Under the statute of 28 Henry VIII it pos- 
sessed a wide jurisdiction over cases of treason, felony, 
robbery, or murder on the high seas. Later commis- 
sions, however, based upon the statute of 11 and 12 
William III, chapter 7, tended to narrow its powers. 

In 1769 a certain Matthew Turner was tried for the 
murder of Captain Harrop, convicted, and sentenced 
to be hanged. He was reprieved by tiie governor until 
His Majesty's pleasure could be known, and the case 
came before the home government for final settlement. 
The Earl of Hillsborough informed Lieutenant-Gover- 
nor Bull that in a similar case, which had recently come 
up from New York, the crown lawyers gave the opinion 
that the commissions in the colonies had no authority, 
under the statute of 11 and 12 William III, to try per- 

1 Admiralty Court Records, Ms., A and B passim. For a complete 
description of some of these trials see Hughson, Carolina Pirates and 
Colonial Commerce, in Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies in Hist, and Pol. 
Science, XII, 299-301, 338-344, 356-357. 



THE JUDICIAKY 153 

sons charged with murder on the high seas. They were 
to be sent to England for trial.' 

The court of vice-admiralty, as we have seen, was 
first erected in South Carolina in order to enforce the 
acts of trade and navigation. Until the passage of the 
statute of 7 and 8 William III, chapter 22, it was an 
open question whether admiralty courts in the provinces 
had jurisdiction over cases arising under these acts. 
By this law, enacted in 1696, penalties for carrying 
goods in ships not manned according to law could be 
sued for in any court of record at Westminster, or ''in 
any court in His Majesty's plantations where such 
offence shall be committed. ' ' From this it would seem 
that the courts of vice-admiralty in the provinces were 
to have concurrent jurisdiction with the common law 
courts. All other penalties provided for by the trade 
and navigation laws, however, were to be sued for in 
any of His Majesty's courts at Westminster or in Ire- 
land "or in the court of admiralty held in His Majesty's 
plantations respectively, where such offense shall be 
committed, at the pleasure of the officer or informer, or 
in any other plantation belonging to any subject of 
England, wherein no essoin, protection, or wager of law 
shall be allowed. ' ' That is to say, the provincial courts 
of vice-admiralty were practically given exclusive juris- 
diction over all cases arising under these laws. 

As if there could be any further doubt after the pas- 
sage of this act, the whole question was referred to the 

' Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 80, 286-287, 308-309. For an ac- 
count of the New York case see Neiv York Col. Doc, VII, 446, 454-455; 
Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 525-527. 



154 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PROVINCE 

law ofificers of the crown. Opinions were delivered by 
Sir John Cooke, July 23, 1702,^ and by Attorney-Gen- 
eral Northey, August 21, 1702,- defending the jurisdic- 
tion of the admiralty courts. 

Numerous cases of the violation of the acts were tried 
from time to time. As early as Januaiy, 1700, a ship 
called the Cole and Beale galley was forfeited for illegal 
trading.^ A case decided in July, 1729, will serve to 
show the general method of procedure. Don Pedro 
Ramon sailed from Charleston with a cargo of goods in 
the coal St. Antonio, which did not comply with the 
provisions of the law requiring ships to be built and 
owned in England or the colonies, and to be manned 
by crews of whom three-fourths were Englishmen. 
Thomas Gadsden, collector of the customs, presented 
an information against Ramon, and the case came to 
trial before Judge Whitaker. Mr. Hume and Mr. 
James Graham represented Gadsden and Mr. Charles 
Pinckney looked after the interests of the defendant. 
After several days spent in hearing arguments, the 
judge decided, July 12, that the vessel and its cargo 
should be sold and the proceeds, after all fees were 
paid, divided equally between the king. President Mid- 
dleton, and informer Gadsden.^ 

Suits of mariners against masters of vessels for wages 
due them were tried in the court of vice-admiralty. 
Such a case came up in August and September, 1729, 

1 Forsyth, Cases and Opinions on Constitutional Law, 91-93. 

2 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 499-502. 

3 PuUic Records, Ms., IV, 148-160. 

* Admiralty Court Records, Ms., A and B. Middleton received his 
share as acting governor of the province. 



THE JUDICIARY 155 

between Nicholas AVorsdale, late mate, and Thomas 
Barry, master of the snow William.^ Another class of 
cases originated as follows: When a ship came into the 
harbor badly damaged by storm, the master would apply 
to the judge of the vice-admiralty for some one to exam- 
ine it to see if it could be repaired or had best be sold 
at auction. The judge would appoint five or six ship- 
wrights to examine the vessel, and, on their report, 
would make his decision. A large number of such cases 
came before the court after the great storm of 1752.^ 

There remain now a few words to be said in regard 
to the jurisdiction of the court in time of war. Letters 
of marque and reprisal were issued by the governor and 
council, and prize cases were tried before the court. 
Many such letters were issued during the wars with 
Spain and France. One of November 22, 1739, was 
made out to George Austin, merchant, and James White- 
field, master of a vessel. They gave a bond of two thou- 
sand pounds sterling to obey all orders from the gover- 
nor. They were empowered to take and destroy the 
ships, vessels, and goods of the king of Spain and his 
subjects, and bring into any of the ports of His Majesty's 
dominions the prizes captured, there to be adjudicated 
in the court of vice-admiralty. Then followed a list 
of instructions. They were not, for instance, to convert 
captured vessels and goods to their own use until they 
had been adjudged lawful prizes in a court of vice- 
admiralty; at least one-fourth of their seamen must 
be natives or naturalized subjects of Great Britain; all 

1 Admiralty Court Records, Ms., A and B. 

2 Ibid., E and F. 



156 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

laws and customs relating to privateers must be obeyed.^ 
Numerous prize cases were tried during the war with 
France in 1758-1759. One of the most important was 
that of Pilkington et al. vs. Snoiv Vroiv Aletta and 
Cargo. The privateer Nassau captured a Dutch vessel, 
or snow, laden with a cargo of sugar, cotfee, etc., worth 
about £30,000 currency, which it was said had come 
from the French islands. The case was long and hotly 
contested, but the decision was finally given in favor of 
the defendant, and Pilkington had to pay the costs of 
the suit.^ Other cases were decided in favor of the 
captors, as for example, those of The Officers and Men 
of the Penguin vs. the Pearl and Original and John 
Vesey et al. vs. the Sloop Hazard.^ 

Attempt to Establish a Coukt of Exchequer 

In 1732, while the contest was raging between the land 
speculators and their opponents, the Duke of New- 
castle suggested that a court of exchequer should be 
established to put an end to the frauds. Accordingly, 
on the 21st of November, 1732, the governor in council 
issued commissions to Chief Justice Wright as chief 
baron, and to Eleazar Allen, Tweedie Somerville, 
Thomas Cooper, and Daniel Green as puisne barons for 
holding courts of exchequer in the province as often as 
occasion should require.^ There seems to have been 
some doubt in regard to the validity of the order estab- 
lishing the court, and the question was referred to the 

1 Admiralty Court Records, Ms., C and D. 

2 Ibid., F, 64-127. 
sibid., 128-172, 229-245. 

* Council Journals, Ms., V., 218, 223-224. 



THE JUDICIARY 157 

home government. On June 12, 1738, the crown law- 
yers expressed the opinion that His Majesty had the 
undoubted right to erect a court of exchequer in South 
Carolina with all the powers of the English court of 
exchequer. They suggested, however, that it might be 
advisable to send out a special commission authorizing 
the governor to establish it.^ The court was never of 
any consequence and soon became entirely obsolete. 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull, in a letter of 1770, states 
that the people destroyed it by refusing to appear when 
summoned as jurors. They were able to do this be- 
cause the jury act of 1731 did not require attendance on 
the court of exchequer and the assembly would not pass 
a new law on the subject.^ 

1 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 484-485. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 379-380. 



CHAPTER IV 

Colonial, Agents 

There is, perhaps, no topic connected with colonial 
history more interesting or more instructive than a study 
of the English administrative system of the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries. Although we cannot take up 
the subject here, a word or two should be said, by way 
of recapitulation, in regard to the intimate relations 
existing between the royal province and the home gov- 
ernment. The governor, council, and various other 
officials were appointed and their powers and duties 
regulated by commissions and instructions from abroad ; 
all laws were sent to England immediately after pass- 
age, and if disapproved, became null and void. As a 
consequence, the people soon began to see the absolute 
necessity of having a regular agent in London to ex- 
plain colonial laws, to protest against obnoxious instruc- 
tions, to lay petitions before the king and parliament, 
and, in short, to act as a general lobbyist. These agents 
were of various kinds: there were the regular colony 
agents, elected for a definite term by act of the general 
assembly; special agents, elected also by an act of the 
general assembly, but only to advocate some particular 
measure or to protest against some particular griev- 
ance ; agents of the lower house alone, whose principal 
duty was to advocate the cause of the assembly in their 

158 



COLONIAL AGENTS 159 

continual struggle with the governor and council; 
agents of the council alone; and finally, extra-legal 
agents sent by political factions within the colony.^ 

The earliest instance of an agent in South Carolina 
is of the latter description. John Ash and, later, 
Joseph Boone were sent over by the Dissenters in 1704- 
1705 to protest against the religious disqualification act. 
The success of their mission has already been noticed 
in the chapter on the proprietary period. 

On December 12, 1712, the first "Act for appointing 
an Agent to solicit the affairs of this Province in the 
Kingdom of Great Britain" was passed. Landgrave 
Abel Kettleby was appointed to represent the interests 
of the province before parliament and the proprietors. 
He was authorized to use his best efforts to procure a 
continuation of the bounty on naval stores exported from 
South Carolina to Great Britain, and to secure permis- 
sion to export naval stores and rice to Spain, Portugal, 
and all places in Africa and America, or to as many 
of the said places as possible. A committee of five 
was appointed to correspond with him and send over 
instructions. He was to receive one hundred and fifty 
pounds currency as an inducement to undertake the 
agency, as much more in case the bounty act was re- 
newed, and five hundred pounds whenever parliament 
passed an act allowing the shipment of rice to the places 
mentioned above, or a proportional amount for as many 
of those places as could be procured. As no par- 
ticular term of service was mentioned and no annual 

> For a very thorough general discussion of this subject see the 
article on Colonial Agencies in England during the Eighteenth Century 
by E. P. Tanner in Pol. Science Quarterly, March, 1901, Vol. XVI, 24-49. 



160 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

salary provided, Kettleby may be classed as a special 
agent.^ 

Two years later, another act was passed fixing his 
salary at two hundred pounds per annum and providing 
for his continuance as agent ''until removed by a vote 
of the House of Commons, who shall from time to time 
have power to appoint and depose the aforesaid Agent 
and his successors according to their discretion for- 
ever. "- Thus the colony agent became the agent of 
the lower house. 

Kettleby 's special mission was to represent the in- 
terests of the province before parliament. The as- 
sembly were evidently afraid to trust him in their con- 
test with the proprietors, for they passed an order, 
February 24, 1715, constituting Joseph Boone and 
Richard Beresford agents to transact the affairs of the 
province with the Lords Proprietors,^ They were in- 
structed to apply for a redress of grievances, to desire 
a final settlement of the price of lands, to ask for county 
courts, and to complain of Chief Justice Trott's mon- 
opoly of judicial offices. In case the proprietors would 
afford no relief, they were to appeal to a higher power.'* 
It was resolved that they should be paid two thousand 
pounds for their services by ordinance of the general 
assembly.'^ The other branches of the legislature failed 

1 Statutes, II, 600-602. Rice was at this time one of the enumerated 
articles which could be exported only to England. 3 and 4 Anne, chap- 
ter 5, section 12. 

^Statutes, II, 621-622. 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., IV, 372. 

*Ibid., 378-380. 

5 Hid., 383. Kettleby resided in England, Boone and Beresford in 
the province; hence their expenses were heavier and they had to be 
paid higher salaries. 



COLONIAL AGENTS 161 

to observe tliis resolution; Deputy Governor Daniel 
held up tlie tax bill in June, 1716, until the clause 
providing for them was struck out.^ As we shall see 
in another connection, the dispute over this matter 
dragged on for several years after the province came 
under the crown.^ Kettleby continued to act as agent 
until December 10, 1716, when he was dismissed by 
the order of the lower house. ^ Beresford returned to 
South Carolina soon afterwards and Boone remained 
the sole agent. It was largely through his representa- 
tions that the English government was induced to take 
charge of the province after the overthrow of proprie- 
tary rule. 

A regular colonial agency, created by act of the gen- 
eral assembly for a definite time, with a definite salary, 
and equally under the control of council and assembly, 
did not come into existence until after the establishment 
of the royal government. By an act of September 19, 
1721, provision was made for such an agency. The 
preamble stated the necessity of having some one in 
England to look after the interests of the province and 
declared that this could best be done by sending a mem- 
ber of the council and a member of the commons house 
who were well versed in provincial affairs. Accord- 
ingly^, Francis Yonge of the council and John Lloyd of 
the assembly were selected.^ They were instructed to 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 130-132. 

2 See Chapter VI, Financial History. 
'i Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 187. 

* Yonge, it will be remembered, had been sent to England by Gov- 
ernor Johnson in 1719 to try to induce the proprietors to make some 
concessions to the people. See the introductory chapter on the Pro- 
prietary Period. 
11 



162 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

obey such orders as they might receive from the gover- 
nor, council, and assembly before embarkation, and from 
the committee of correspondence afterwards. This com- 
mittee consisted of Honorable Arthur Middleton and 
Mr. Ralph Izard from the council, and Messrs. Richard 
AUein, William Blakeway, Thomas Hepworth, Charles 
Hill, and Andrew Allen from the commons house, any 
three of whom were to constitute a quorum.^ An addi- 
tional ordinance, ratified two days later, added Richard 
Beresford and John Barnwell, members of the commons 
house, and increased the quorum to four, of whom one 
at least should be a councilor.- They were to carry on 
a regular correspondence with the agents, send over the 
orders of the general assembly, and give such instruc- 
tions as they thought proper, when the general assembly 
was not in session.^ The agents were paid three thou- 
sand one hundred pounds currency in advance. The 
act was to continue in force one year from the date of 
ratification.^ 

A glance at the instructions to Yonge and Lloyd will 
convey some idea of what an agent was expected to do. 
They were to make an effort to induce the crown to pur- 

i statutes, III, 146-147. 

2 Ibid., 157. Both of these men were well qualified. Beresford. was 
the same who had been agent with Boone, while Barnwell had just 
returned from a special mission to England. 

' 3 This committee, revived from time to time, was continued in existence 
until the Revolution. During the last few years of the colonial period, 
however, its members were nearly all drawn from the lower house and 
it was entirely under their control. When the colonies began to ap- 
point committees to correspond with one another in 1773, the South 
Carolina assembly found it unnecessary to appoint a new committee 
and simply utilized this. 

*Ibid., 146-147. 



COLONIAL AGENTS 163 

chase the territorial rights of the proprietors and make 
North Carolina a dependency of South Carolina ; to ask 
His Majesty to supply the province with arms and 
ammunition and to send over three or four regiments 
to protect the frontiers; to represent the dangerous 
consequence of the encroachments of the Spanish and 
French and esijecially of their intrigues among the 
Indians; to complain to the commissioners of the cus- 
toms about the conduct of Colonel William Rhett, sur- 
veyor and comptroller of the customs; to solicit leave 
to make Port Royal a port of entry ; to ask that Charles- 
ton might be incorporated with a charter similar to that 
of the city of New York ; to endeavor to secure a bounty 
on naval stores and to have rice taken off the enumer- 
ated list; to answer questions relative to the state of 
the province ; and, finally, to solicit the royal assent to 
all acts and ordinances sent over by the provincial as- 
sembly.^ 

Lloyd returned to South Carolina in the winter of 
1722-23. With one or two short intermissions, during 
which the province had no agent, Yonge was regularly 
re-elected until 1727. His salary soon became definitely 
fixed at two hundred pounds sterling per annum.^ 

Yonge was succeeded in April, 1727, by Mr. Samuel 
Wragg, a London merchant who carried on trade with 
the province.^ Owing to the long deadlock between the 
council and assembly over the currency bills, Wragg 's 
term was allowed to expire and the regular agency was 

^Public Records, Ms., IX, 121-131. 

2 Statutes, III, 183, 251-252, 267-268. 

3 Ibid., 266-267. 



164 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

vacant until the re-establisliment of order after Gover- 
nor Johnson's arrival. In 1729 the council appointed 
Stephen Godin, another London merchant, agent to rep- 
resent their views in England and to try to obtain 
proper instructions from the king to the governor who 
was about to be sent out/ 

On August 20, 1731, Peregrine Fury was elected agent 
for one year at a salary of one hundred pounds sterling, " 
The salary was soon increased to two hundred pounds 
sterling, equal to fourteen hundred pounds currency, and 
this continued to be the regular allowance during the 
remainder of the colonial period. Fury also resided in 
London and was highly recommended by His Grace the 
Duke of Newcastle.^ He filled the position of agent 
continuously for eighteen years and always proved him- 
self to be a capable, honest, and efficient servant. Dur- 
ing this period there originated a custom, adopted 
merely for convenience, which later gave rise to con- 
siderable controversy. This consisted in allowing the 
agent to continue in ser^^ce after the act of appoint- 
ment had expired. Appointed for one year by the act 
of March 17, 1733, Fury served for five years, and was 
regularly provided for in the tax estimate, before 
another act on the subject was passed. Subsequently, 
he was appointed for two years, and served three.* 

For some reason, probably because of his failure to 
induce the British government to approve the paper 

1 Public Records, Ms., XIII, 238, 350-372. 

2 Statutes, III, 307-308. The name is sometimes spelled Fiirye. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., V, 112. 

* Ibid., 405; Grimke, Public Laws of S. Car., p. xxi; Com. House 
Journals, Ms., X, 21-22, XXX, 585-586; Statutes, VI, 616-617. 



COLONIAL AGENTS 165 

money act of June 17, 1746, the assembly began to tire 
of Fury. In June, 1747, they passed an act appointing 
Mr. John Sharpe agent, which the council amended by 
substituting Fury's name. By a vote of ten to nine the 
amendment was accepted, and Fury was retained for 
two years longer.^ Finally, in May, 1749, a proposition 
to continue him in service was voted down, and Mr. 
James Crokatt was elected in his place.^ Crokatt had 
for many years been one of the leading merchants of 
Charleston. In June, 1739, however, he closed up his 
affairs in the province and went to London, where he 
had since been in business.^ Governor Glen's speech 
on ratifying the ordinance of appointment suggests that 
Crokatt was personally obnoxious to him. Thus, after 
complaining of the dismissal from service of an old and 
faithful servant whose conduct had been approved for 
many years, he assured the assembly that they could 
not have chosen a more suitable person than Mr. 
Crokatt, if they had any complaints to make against 
their governor.* 

On July 6, 1753, Crokatt wrote to the committee of 
correspondence of the general assembly asking leave to 
resign. He stated that he was sorry that he had ever 
accepted the post, since it conflicted with his private 
business, and that he would have resigned long before 
had he known of any good person to succeed himself. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXII, 722, 749; Grimke, Public Laivs of 
8. Car., p. xxxvii. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIV, 337-338; Statutes, III, 723. 
3,8. Car. Gazette, No. 279, June 9, 1739; Public Records, Ms., XX, 

3G3. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIV, 619-620. 



166 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Mr. Charles Pinckney had recently arrived in London 
with the intention of living there, and he suggested that 
the general assembly would do well to appoint him.^ 

The council accepted the resignation and requested 
the lower house to appoint a committee to confer in re- 
gard to the choice of his successor. Governor Glen 
urged that Fury should again be appointed. The assem- 
bly declared that they hoped to retain Crokatt as agent 
and had written urging him to reconsider his resolution 
to resign. This reply aroused the anger of the council 
and they hastened to call attention to the fact that the 
ordinance appointing Crokatt had long since expired 
and that there could be no legally constituted agent 
without a new ordinance. The answer to this was that 
both Fury and Crokatt had acted as agents for many 
years after the expiration of the ordinances appointing 
them. If they did, said the council, it was only by the 
joint consent of all three branches of the legislature. 
They could see no reason for withdrawing from their 
resolution to accept the resignation.^ 

A recess of the assembly put an end to the conflict 
for a time, but it was renewed when the houses met 
again in January, 1754. A letter had, in the meantime, 
been received from Crokatt agreeing to continue as 
agent.^ The question now was in regard to the pay- 
ment of his salary. If that could be secured, he might 
still serve the province without any formal ordinance 
of re-election. Practically, it meant, could the assem- 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XXII, 90-92. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIX, 60-61, 62, 77-78, 122-123, 124- 
125, 128-129. 

3 Ibid., XXIX, 458. 



COLONIAL AGENTS 167 

bly through its assumed control over money bills keep 
an agent in office against the will of both governor and 
council? In the yearly estimate, as first drawn up on 
March 12, Crokatt's salary of fourteen hundred pounds 
currency was placed under the head of allowances to 
public officers, while his account of disbursements, 
amounting to one hundred and fifty-nine pounds, fifteen 
shillings, six pence, came under the head of writing and 
printing for the public service/ A revision was made 
a few days later, in which his name was omitted under 
the head of public officers and the entire sum for ser- 
vices and disbursements placed under the head of writ- 
ing, printing, and other services for the public.^ The 
council expressed surprise at this transfer and asked 
to have the particulars of Mr. Crokatt's services sent 
them so that they could form some judgment of the 
reward to which he was entitled.^ The assembly now 
became indignant and infonned them that the agent 
of the province was paid by the people and that he 
should be selected by the representatives of the i^eo- 
ple, notwithstanding his appointment could be made 
legally only with the consent of governor and council. 
They, the representatives of the people, were voting 
the people's money and were accountable to none but 
their constituents. Then followed the most important 
part of the message, a copy of a resolution of the assem- 
bly, "That no Account, Petition, or other Paper that 
shall be laid before this House for the future of, for, 
or concerning any claim or demand whatever for any 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXX, 346-347. 

2 IMd., 389. 
3lhid., 404. 



168 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

matter or thing done or to be done for the sei*\dce of the 
Public shall be sent to the council for their Inspection. ' ' ^ 
The reply of the council, made April 9, was in an angry, 
defiant tone. There was no essential difference, they 
declared, between giving Mr. Crokatt fourteen hundred 
pounds as a public officer, which he was not, and voting 
him the same amount for services which he had not per- 
formed. He had no legal standing whatever. He was 
empowered by law to correspond with a committee of 
both houses ; but none such existed, for the council had 
accepted his resignation and refused to appoint their 
part of the committee. He certainly had no right to 
correspond with either house separately." 

The lower house still refused to amend the estimate, 
and the tax bill was rejected by the council, April 12, 
because of the obnoxious item.'' A second bill, passed 
a few days later, met the same fate.* The clamor of 
public creditors, together with the need of money to aid 
the northern provinces in the French and Indian War, 
rendered an early settlement of the dispute an impera- 
tive necessity. Governor Glen remonstrated with the 
council and they agreed to pass a tax bill without change. 
Accordingly, a third bill was introduced and enacted 
into a law. May 20, 1755;^ This was a double victory. 
It meant not only that the agent was to be merely the 
servant of the lower house, but it was another step in 
asserting absolute control over money bills. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., 408-411. ] 

2 Ihid., 425-429. 

^Ihid., 438, 441-442; Council Journals, Ms., XXIV, 60. 
* Council Journals, Ms., XXIV, 84. 

5 76?d., 1)2-03; Public Records, Ms., XXVI, 190-192; Statutes, IV, 
18-19. 



COLONIAL AGENTS 169 

Having carried their point, the house magnanimously 
agreed to substitute another agent for Crokatt. Mr. 
William Middleton was elected March 19, 1756, but he 
refused to serve, and Mr. James Wright was chosen for 
a two years ' term, November 19, 1756. Wright was the 
son of Chief Justice Robert Wright, who incurred the 
anger of the commons on account of his defence of the 
habeas corpus act during Governor Johnson's admin- 
istration. He was a native of the province and had just 
served it for fifteen years as attorney-general. Reach- 
ing England in October, 1757, he continued as agent 
until July, 1760, when he resigned to accept a commis- 
sion as lieutenant-governor of Georgia.^ 

The province was without an agent until May 19, 
1762, when Charles Garth, son of John Garth, member 
of parliament for Devizes, was appointed.^ He served 
as agent from 1762 until relations with England were 
broken off in 1775. During part of this time he also 
represented the interests of the lower house of the Mary- 
land legislature.^ In 1765 he succeeded his father in 
parliament and was thus placed in a position to render 
his clients more effectual aid.^ 

1 statutes, IV, 26-27, 34-35; Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, 
Part II, 7. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXII, Part II, 51. Wright arrived 
in Georgia in October, 1700, was appointed governor in Marcli, 1761, and 
created a baronet in December, 1772. He was the last royal governor 
of Georgia. Jones, Hi.story of Georgia, I, 541, II, 26, 126. 

3 Statutes, IV, 164-165; 8. Car. Gazette, April 3, 1762. 

* Maryland Archives, Correspondence of Governor Sharpe, III, 356, 
385, 431; Mereness, Maryland as a Proprietary Province, 372-373, 474, 
481. 

5/S'. Car. Gazette, April 20, 1765. 



170 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

The ordinance, under which Garth was appointed, 
provided for a committee of correspondence consisting 
of any four members of the council, chosen by them- 
selves, and the speaker and such of their members as 
the lower house should choose. Nine were made a quo- 
rum and there was no provision that any of them should 
come from the council. The assembly appointed seven- 
teen members on the committee.^ The result was that 
all the council members could not form a quorum or even 
a majority of a quorum, whereas the assembly members 
could meet and do business without a single councilor 
being present. This was exactly what they did, and 
many were the reports and letters which they sent to 
and received from the agent of which the governor and 
council were entirely ignorant. Through him the as- 
sembly made complaint to the king of Governor Boone 's 
conduct in the Gadsden case,^ and through him a me- 
morial was presented to the Earl of Shelburne com- 
plaining of Chief Justice Skinner.^ He defended the 
lower house in the Wilkes fund controversy and labored 
to secure the recall of the additional instruction of April 
14, 1770 ; * he joined with the agents of the other colonies 
in urging parliament to repeal the revenue acts.^ These 
and many similar services indicate how completely the 
province agent had become the servant of the assem- 
bly. The advantage of such an ally cannot be overesti- 
mated. 

^Statutes, IV, 164; Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 121. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXX, 149-152. 

3 Ibid., XXXI, 274-277. 
*Ibid., XXXII, 422-425. 

« Corn. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, 691-692. 



CHAPTER V 

Militia and Defense 
Militia 

Occupying for many years the position of an extreme 
outpost of the English colonies, South Carolina was ex- 
posed to many dangers. There were the Indians almost 
surrounding it, the Spaniards at St, Augustine, and the 
negroes at home. The province was weak at its estab- 
lishment and was doomed to remain so. The tendency 
of the Fundamental Constitutions and of the Barbadian 
immigration was to build up an aristocratic settlement 
—an aristocracy based on slavery. It has become an 
axiom of political economy that free labor and slavery 
can never flourish side by side. So in South Carolina, 
until the Scotch-Irish migration toward the close of the 
colonial period, we find very few white laborers, only 
a sprinkling of indented servants and transported con- 
victs, the progenitors of the "poor white trash" of a 
later day. The whites were soon vastly outnumbered 
by the blacks, and to their other misfortunes was thus 
added the continual fear of a slave insurrection, espe- 
cially as the Spaniards encouraged the negroes to revolt 
and offered freedom to all who could escape to St. 
Augustine. 

The wars with the Spanish in 1686 and 1702-1704, 
the combined attack of the Spanish and French on 

171 



172 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVHSTCE 

Charleston in 1706, the Yemassee war in 1715, the con- 
test with the pirates in 1718, the slave uprising of 1739, 
the struggle with the Spanish in 1740, the war with the 
Cherokees in 1760-1761, and, finally, the contest with 
the mother country itself, all taught the Carolinian the 
necessity of being well trained in the use of anns and 
ready to go to the front on a moment's notice. 

Under the proprietary rule they were compelled to 
rely on their own resources exclusively, and, during the 
royal period, very little help was ever received from 
England. Accordingly, we find the colony on Ashley 
river, shortly after its settlement there, making pro- 
vision for a militia organization. On October 26, 1671, 
the grand council passed an ordinance which required 
all of the men in the settlement, except members of the 
council and their attendants, to meet at the times and 
places appointed by the company commanders to ex- 
ercise in the use of arms and accustom themselves to 
military discipline. Penalties were provided for those 
who refused to appear at the stated times. Provision 
was also made for volunteer watches in the city, a duty 
likewise enforced by penalties.^ We are informed by 
a letter from Governor West to Lord Ashley that in 
March, 1671, there were less than one hundred and 
fifty men in the colony and they were divided into two 
companies.^ A few colonists arrived from Barbadoes 
and England during the latter part of the year, and 
by January, 1672, the number able to bear arms had 
increased to two hundred and sixty-eight.^ 

^Council Journals, Ms., I, 11-12. 

2 Shaftesbury Papers, 8. Car. His. Soc. Col., V, 296. 

3 Ibid., 382. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 173 

The colony now continued to grow, and the militia no 
doubt drilled regularly. The earliest statutes have not 
been preserved; not even a title is found before 1682. 
Among the five laws enacted that year is one entitled, 
''An Act for settling the militia." Similar acts were 
passed in 1685, 1687, 1690, 1693, 1696, 1697, and 1701, 
none of which is extant.^ Each of them probably ex- 
pired in two or three years and the following act em- 
bodied some new features, so that by the end of the 
century the form had become fixed. At any rate, the act 
of 1703, which is the earliest that has been preserved, 
differs little from those of Revolutionary times. Dur- 
ing the eighteenth century militia laws were passed in 
1701, 1703, 1707, 1721, 1734, 1739,^ 1747, 1760, 1778, 
1782, 1784, and 1794, the last being supplemented by 
acts of 1795, 1796, 1797, and 1800.=^ These laws were 
usually enacted for definite periods, ranging from one 
to seven years, and reviving acts were passed from 
time to time. 

At first the militia consisted entirely of infantry, but 
as early as 1721 there was a troop of cavalry under the 
command of Colonel Joseph Blake,"* and in 1757 an 
artillery company was established in Charleston.^ 

Taking up the system in detail, we come first to the 
ofiBcers.*' The governor of the province was commander 

^statutes, II, V, 38, 40, 77, 124, 135, 182; Grimke, PuUic Laws of 
S. Car., pp. vi, ix. 

2 An additional and explanatory act. 

3 Statutes, II, 182, VIII, 485-508, IX, 617-691. 
* Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 24. 
««. Car. Gazette, No. 1179, January 20, 1757. 

6 The account given here is based upon the law of 1747. Statutes, IX, 
645-6G3. 



174 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

in chief of all the forces. He could, in time of war, 
either lead them in person, as for instance Governor 
Moore in the St. Augustine expedition (1702) and Gov- 
ernor Johnson in the attack on the pirates (1718), or 
appoint some one else to do it. His duties were to issue 
commissions to officers, sign warrants for the collection 
of fines and for the impressment of food and provisions 
in time of danger, employ watches for the frontier, de- 
clare martial law with the consent of his council, and 
sit with the council as a court for the trial of field offi- 
cers. In 1721 there were two lieutenant-generals, 
Robert Johnson in command of the forces in Berkeley 
and Colleton counties, and James Moore of those in 
Craven and Granville counties.^ 

Regimental officers were the colonel, lieutenant- 
colonel, major, and adjutant, with the customary duties 
of such officers. The young planters usually held these 
positions by turns, one set serving for a year or so and 
then giving way to another. The titles, however, re- 
mained with them, a fact which will account for the 
large number of colonels and majors in South Carolina 
before the Civil War. 

The principal officer of the company was of course 
the captain. He was required to enroll the names of 
all men of military age in his parish or division, and 
to train, exercise, and muster them. He appointed two 
sergeants in his company, who were compelled to serve 
for one year. Their duties were to execute warrants 
for fines on those who failed in their obligations, to 
arrest and confine them in the common gaol at Charles- 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 11. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 175 

ton until sucli fines were paid, and to go with the cap- 
tain on his bi-monthly trip to see that all his men were 
properly armed. The marshal occupied the correspond- 
ing position in the cavalry. 

In every county there were one or more regiments 
and in every parish one or more companies. The larger 
parishes were divided by the field officers into divisions, 
each of which furnished one company. Each company 
was mustered six times a year within the parish. 
When three companies were mustering at the same time 
within six miles of one another, they joined together in 
battalion muster, provided that no company was to be 
compelled to go out of its own county. 

The militia included all white males between the ages 
of sixteen and sixty with certain exceptions, among 
them being members of the council and assembly and 
their officials, crown and provincial officers, ministers of 
the gospel, pilots, feriymen, and white servants em- 
ployed outside of Charleston. In time of actual in- 
vasion, rebellion, or insurrection, all of these men were 
required to serve except members of the council and 
assembly, pilots, and ferrymen. White servants and 
apprentices serving within the limits of St. Philip's, 
Charleston, were armed by their masters and compelled 
to attend all musters. Masters were further required to 
make out lists of their male slaves between the ages of 
sixteen and sixty and to return them to the captains of 
their respective companies, making special note of such 
as were faithful. These were armed and pressed into 
service in time of alarm and actual invasion. In order 
that the man who had the largest number of faithful 



176 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

slaves might not be required to bear more than his share 
of the public burdens, it was provided that the owners 
should be paid seven shillings six pence per day for 
each slave, and in case the slave was killed, receive pay 
for him in full. The proportion of slaves in companies 
outside of Charleston was never to exceed one-third, 
nor, in Charleston, one-half of the whole number. 

As an incentive to valor, a system of pensions was 
provided for such poor free whites as might be wounded 
or killed in service. Slaves and white servants, for tak- 
ing prisoner one of the enemy or capturing his colors, 
gained their freedom, the masters to be reimbursed out 
of the public treasury. Slaves who were especially 
brave in time of action, but who performed neither of 
the deeds mentioned above, received "from the public 
treasurer, yearly, and every year, a livery coat and a 
pair of breeches made of good red negro cloth, turned 
up with blue, and a black hat and a pair of black shoes, 
and shall that day in every year during their lives on 
which such action shall be performed, be freed and 
exempted from all personal labor and service to their 
owner or manager." 

Every person who was liable to service was required 
to keep in his house and bring with him to muster a gun 
or musket, powder-horn and shot-pouch filled with am- 
munition, four spare flints, a bayonet, and a sword or 
hatchet. The commissioned officers in each company 
made occasional trips from house to house to enforce 
this provision. 

An elaborate system of fines and penalties was devised 
for the enforcement of the law. A fine of three pounds 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 177 

currency was the penalty for failure to appear at ordi- 
nary muster and five pounds for the general muster. 
These fines were collected by the company sergeants 
under warrant from the governor, and the money was 
kept by them. All other fines exceeding three pounds 
were turned over by the sergeants to the public treas- 
urer, and all under that amount were kept for their 
own use. 

There were a number of miscellaneous provisions in 
the law which should be noted. No civil process except 
for treason, felony, or breach of the peace could be 
served on persons going to or returning from muster. 
In removing from one district to another, a man was 
held responsible for service in the old district until he 
presented proper certificates to show that he had en- 
rolled in the new one. In case of prospective invasion 
the governor gave the signal by firing six large guns 
at Charleston, two at a time, three minutes apart, and 
the alarm was passed from company to company 
throughout the province, either by couriers or by the 
firing of small arms. 

A few words should be said in regard to the artil- 
lery, the watch, and the patrol system. The Charles- 
ton settlers were very early trained in the use of 
cannon, but no regular artillery company seems to 
have been formed until 1757. The Gazette of Jan- 
uary 20, 1757, states that several gentlemen had entered 
into an association to form an artillery company, and 
had already jDresented a petition to the governor jn-ay- 
ing that it should be regulated by act of the legislature, 

12 



178 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

so as to be of real utility and not for mere parade.^ 
The company was at once organized and went into 
training. The Gazette of November 17, 1758, stated 
that the 10th, being the king's birthday, was fittingly 
celebrated. His Majesty's independent companies, the 
provincial regiment. Colonel Beale's regiment of mili- 
tia, the artillery company, and the free school boys all 
took part in the parade. The item went on to say that 
the advantage of frequent exercise was shown by the 
fact that the artillery company far surpassed the mili- 
tia.^ A statute of July 31, 1760, placed the organiza- 
tion on a legal basis. The company consisted of a 
captain, a captain lieutenant, a first and second lieuten- 
ant, three lieutenant fireworkers, four sergeants, and 
not exceeding one hundred privates, divided into the 
three classes of bombardiers, gunners, and matrosses. 
Each man provided himself with clothing, arms, and 
ammunition, while the government furnished the artil- 
lery chest, gun carriages, powder carts, and ammunition 
wagons. Musters were held not less than eight nor 
more than twelve times a year, and the members were 
excused from all further militia duty.^ An officer and 
a party from His Majesty's royal artillery were de- 
tailed by General Amherst in 1760 to put the new com- 
pany through a course of instruction.^ 

Watch, as a military term, was applied in South Caro- 
lina both to the scouts stationed on the frontier in times 
of danger and to the night police force of Charleston. 

i/S. Car. Gazette, No. 1179, January 20, 1757. 

2 Ibid., No. 1257, November 17, 1758. 

3 Statutes, IX, 6G4-6G6. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 191. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 179 

Examples of the former were the watches established 
on Watch, Otter, Edisto, Bull's and Sullivan's islands 
after the invasion of the French and Spanish in 1706/ 
The night watch at Charleston dates back to the veiy 
beginning of the settlement.'-^ Numerous statutes bear- 
ing on the subject were passed during the closing years 
of the seventeenth and the early years of the eighteenth 
century. Service was compulsory and without com- 
pensation, although substitutes might be employed. 
The town constables were required to prepare a list 
of all male whites between the ages of sixteen and sixty 
and of female heads of families residing in Charles- 
ton. The first six named on the list stood guard under 
the constables, then the next six, and so on by turns. 
The number was increased to ten in 1709. Their prin- 
cipal duties were to patrol the streets, arrest suspicious 
characters out late at night, especially negroes, and to 
keep a lookout for burglars. In periods of public 
danger the number of watchmen was increased." 

Perhaps the most interesting feature connected with 
the militia organization was the patrol system. Early 
in the eighteenth centuiy the blacks began to outnumber 
the whites about three or four to one. In time of in- 
vasion, when it became necessary to utilize as large a 
force as possible, we have already seen that practically 
all the whites as well as the better class of negroes might 
be called into service. The result would be to leave at 
home the worst class of negroes, who would be liable 

1 statutes, II, 300-302. 

2 Shaftesbury Papers, 8. Car. His. Soc. Col., V, 180, 288, 406-407. 

3 Statutes, VII, 7-8, 34-35, 54-50. 



180 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

at any moment to rise in rebellion. To meet this danger 
the first patrol act was passed November 4, 1704. From 
every militia company a captain and ten men were se- 
lected and formed into a mounted patrol, whose duty 
it was to ride from one plantation to another, station 
sentries and guards, and use every precaution to pre- 
vent an uprising. They were to do this on occasions 
of general alarm and as often as the governor or cap- 
tain of the patrol thought it necessary. They were 
exempted from the regular militia duty.^ 

Evidently the patrolmen were not compelled to go 
the rounds very often, for complaints began to be made 
that they were exempt from the ordinary militia obli- 
gations and had an easy time generally. So an act of 
1721 repealed the law of 1704, and required all patrol- 
men to enlist in their respective militia companies. The 
captain of each company was then authorized to appoint 
as many of his men to ride patrol as he saw fit and to 
relieve them from time to time by appointing others in 
their places.' 

The time of riding was still left to the discretion of 
the governor and patrol captains until 1734, when it 
was found necessary to maintain a more regular system. 
A patrol captain was commissioned by the governor in 
each militia district with instructions to select four men 
to ride with him. They were empowered to examine 
every plantation in the district at least once a month, 
to whip slaves who were caught away from home with- 
out passes, to break into negro houses and search for 

1 statutes, II, 254-255. 

2 Ibid., IX, 639-640. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 181 

concealed weapons, and to beat or even kill slaves who 
made resistance. The members served for one year 
without compensation and were exempted from militia 
duty/ After the Stono insurrection (1739), an act was 
passed providing for the division of the i^rovince into 
regular patrol districts and increasing the powers of 
patrol riders. The militia officers made out patrol lists 
for each district including the names of all owners of 
settled plantations, whether residents or non-residents, 
of all white male inhabitants possessing at least one 
slave, of the adult sons of men possessing two slaves, 
and of overseers. On each muster day, the captain of 
militia checked off not more than seven names on each 
list, of persons who were required to serve until the next 
muster day, a period of about two months. Women 
owning less than ten slaves were exempted. The vari- 
ous crown and provincial officers were not liable to ser- 
vice in person, though presumably they had to employ 
substitutes.^ The patrol law of 1746, practically the 
same as this act of 1740, was renewed from time to time, 
was made perpetual in 1783, and, with some slight 
changes, remained in force until the downfall of the 
slavery system.* 

The militia as a whole was a fairly effective body. 
Company musters were held with a considerable degree 
of regularity and there was usually a grand general 
muster on His Majesty's birthday. At times, after 
several years of peace, the inhabitants would be lulled 

» statutes, III, 395-399. 

2 Ihid., 568-573. 

^Ihid., 681-G85, IV, 541. 



182 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

into a sense of security and the law would not be strictly 
enforced. Thus, in 1756, Governor Lyttleton wrote 
the Board of Trade that the militia had formerly been 
reckoned good, but had lately fallen into a very bad 
condition.^ Then, in 1771, the Charleston grand jury 
presented it as a grievance that the militia officers in 
the province did not muster and train their companies 
as often as the law required.^ As the controversy with 
the mother country grew more bitter, the militia became 
active. Writing to the Earl of Dartmouth, under date 
of May 1, 1775, Lieutenant-Governor Bull stated that 
the Charleston companies were mustering very fre- 
quently in order to accustom themselves to military 
discipline and to be ready for service when necessary.^ 
The number of whites of military age at different 
periods was approximately as follows: 1671, one hun- 
dred and fifty ;^ 1672, two hundred and sixty-eight:'^ 
1708, nine hundred and fifty;*' 1721, two thousand;' 
1749, five thousand ; ^ and 1774, twelve thousand.^ 

Eangers 

In addition to the militia, a small force was employed 
in time of danger to range the frontiers. On November 
14, 1716, shortly after the close of the war with the 

^PuUic Records, Ms., XXVII, 201. 

2/8. Car. Gazette, No. 1851, April 18, 1771. 

'i Public Records, Ms., XXXV, 88-89. 

* Shaftesbury Papers, S. Car. His. Soc. Col., V, 296. 

5 Ibid., 382. 

6 Public Records, Ms., V, 204. 
' New York Col. Doc, V, 610. 

s Carroll, His. Col. of 8. Car., II, 218. 
s Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 190. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 18S 

Yemassees, Deputy Governor Daniel urged the assem- 
bly to do something toward checking the inroads of the 
Indians and suggested that a body of men be employed 
to range continually.* The house took the speech un- 
der consideration and resolved to provide for one hun- 
dred men for six months at £5 per month, two captains 
at £15, and two lieutenants at £10.^ A statute em- 
bodying these resolutions was ratified, December 15, 
1716.^ Men were drafted from different parts of 
the province and compelled to serve. ^ Before the six 
months expired an act was passed to continue the men 
in sei*vice until November 1, 1717.^ 

They were promptly discharged on November 1, 
and there is no further reference to rangers in the 
records until December 19, 1722, when the assembly 
resolved that some should be stationed on the southern 
frontiers.*^ Nothing seems to have come of this, how- 
ever, as no provision for the men was made in the 
next supply bill. A small force, consisting of a captain, 
sergeant, and twenty men, was employed in 1727 and 
kept in service until September 29, 1736.^ 

No rangers were employed from 1736 to 1744. Then, 
as the result of a petition from Granville county setting 
forth the danger from Indians, a troop of twenty men 
was raised to scout between the Savannah and the Sal- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 165-16G. 

2 76id., 166. 

3 Statutes, II, 691. Title only. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 347-348. 

^Statutes, III, 9. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 136-137. 

Uhid., VII, 623, 628; Statutes, III, 316, 335, 359, 391, 446, 481. 



184 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

kehatchie rivers, that is in the present counties of Barn- 
Well, Hampton, and Beaufort. They were disbanded 
after six months' service.^ On April 16, 1746, the 
assembly resolved to provide for two troops of twenty 
men each, one to range on the northern and the other 
on the southern frontier. Before the recruiting was 
completed the necessity had passed away, and those 
who had already enlisted were dismissed.^ 

In the spring of 1748, two troops of fourteen men 
each were enlisted under Captains John Fairchild and 
James Francis, to range the country "from the Con- 
garees to Ninety-six and from thence to the Catawba 
Nation." This range included the present counties of 
Fairfield, Newberry, Union, and Chester and parts of 
the adjoining counties. They had orders to make 
prisoners of war or put to death all French and French 
Indians captured while going to or from the Catawba 
lands or found anywhere near the new townships.^ A 
few months later they were discharged and detachments 
from His Majesty's independent companies were de- 
pended upon to protect the frontiers.^ 

These men were of little service, since they were 
under English officers, were inexperienced in border 
warfare, and were averse to being broken up into 
small detachments. The French continued to poison 
the minds of the Indians, and incursions into the fron- 
tier settlements became alarmingly frequent. Finally, 
in April and May of 1751, the assembly resolved to 

1 Co7n. House Journals, Ms., XIX, 626-627, XX, 147-148. 

2 Ibid., XXI, 494, 610. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., XV, 198-200, 209-210, 222-224. 
*md., 341. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 185 

equip four troops of rangers, each consisting of a cap- 
tain, lieutenant, and twenty men, in addition to Indian 
guides/ Tliey were commanded by Captains John 
Fairchild, Roger Gibson, James McPherson, and 
Christian Minnick, and remained in service for four 
months.^ 

Scarcely any question of importance ever came be- 
fore the assembly that they did not in some way en- 
croach upon the powers of the governor and council. 
The appointment and equipment of rangers was no 
exception. A resolution of February 7, 1755, provided 
for a troop of fifty men to range the country between 
the Broad and Savannah rivers. Not only were the 
numbers and pay of the men specified, but a certain 
William Gray was recommended for captain. About 
the same time, a committee report on the boundary dis- 
pute with North Carolina was sent to the governor. 
George Hunter and John Pearson were recommended 
as fit persons to make the survey.^ 

In a message of March 5, Governor Glen severely 
reproved the assembly for thus interfering in matters 
purely executive. He stated that he would appoint 
Hunter and Pearson, as they were well qualified for 
the work, but added that he must express his surprise 
at their uniform practice of naming every person to 
be employed in the public service. Passing over Gray, 
however, he commissioned Captain Francis to lead the 
rangers. The house objected and declared that they 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVI, 337-339, 4G1, 493. 

2 Ibid., XXVII, 479. 

<^Ibid., XXX, 223-224, 228-229, 276-278, 305. 



186 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVIKCE 

had provided sucli high pay for the captain with the 
express purpose of inducing Mr. Gray to accept. They 
requested as a favor that the governor would reconsider 
his action. Glen replied that, as they had used the 
words request and favor, he would recall Francis' com- 
mission and make out one for Gray. The assembly 
then returned him sincere thanks for granting their 
request. 

The troop was probably not raised at all, since no 
provision was made for it in the estimates for the next 
two years. Two small troops were enlisted under Cap- 
tains Fairchild and Hunt in 1759 with orders to range 
the country between the Broad and Saluda rivers.^ 

When the war with the Cherokees began, the assembly 
resolved, in February, 1760, to provide for seven troops 
of rangers of seventy-five men each, to be continued in 
the pay of the province until July 1.'^ The enlistment 
was almost completed by April 5. The commanders 
were Captains Grinnan, Brown, Watts, Pearson, Russel, 
Bosher, and McNeal.* A few months later. Major Wil- 
liam Thomson was appointed major commandant of the 
entire force.^ An eighth troop was added in January, 
1761, forming a regiment of six hundred men,*' Con- 
tinued in service until October 1, 1761, they took part 
in the Indian campaigns of Colonels Montgomery and 
Grant. The number of troops was reduced to four on 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., 285-292, 305, 312-313. 

2/6t(Z., XXXIII, Part I, 38-39. 

»/6id., 69-70. 

*S. Car. Gazette, No. 1338, April 7, 1760. 

6 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIII, Part II, 13. 

eihid., 24; S. Car. Gazette, No. 1382, January 24, 1761. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 187 

October 1, 1761, to two on April 1, 1762, and the re- 
mainder were disbanded, July 1, 1762/ 

In the summer of 1764, a troop of twenty men was 
enlisted under Captain Patrick Calhoun to range for 
six months around the Long Canes settlement in what 
is now Abbeville county." This was the last body of 
rangers in the pay of the province until the Revolution. 
In consequence of an uprising of the Creeks in Georgia, 
the assembly resolved, March 10, 1774, to raise three 
troops of seventy-five men each and send them to the 
aid of the Georgians. A bill to that effect was rejected 
by the council.^ 

Pbovinciali Navy 

A study of the defenses of South Carolina would be 
incomplete were mention not made of the navy. The 
term may seem too dignified to be applied to crude scout 
boats and galleys, but, whatever name may be used, the 
fact remains that they performed a very useful service 
for the province. 

The beginning of the provincial navy dates from 
1713. On December 18 of that year, there was passed 
''An Act for appointing two Scout Canoes, and pro- 
viding necessaries for the same." One canoe, manned 
by two white men and three Indians, was to cruise be- 
tween Port Royal and St. Augustine ; the other, manned 
by two white men and two Indians, between Port Royal 
and Stono. Their principal duties were to capture 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIV, 254, 267-268, XXXV, 44, 48. 
Ubid., XXXVI, 54, XXXVII, 107. Patrick Calhoun was the father 
of John C. Calhoun. 

Ubid., XXXIX, 116, 166. 



188 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

runaway slaves and to keep a lookout for French and 
Spanish warships/ 

These boats were kept continually in service until 
September, 1736; their use was then discontinued for 
two years, and they were again employed until after 
the peace of 1763.^ No provision was made for them 
in the annual estimates after 1764 and shortly after 
that date the boats were sold and the system given up 
entirely.^ 

By an act of 1723, the crews were increased to seven 
men each, of whom the commander received fifteen 
pounds per month and the men six, in addition to pro- 
visions and ammunition.^ Their numbers were still 
further increased later on. In the estimates for 1741- 
42, provision was made for two commanders and twenty- 
three men, for the year 1757-58, two commanders and 
twenty-two men, and for the year 1763, two commanders 
and twenty-four men.^ 

The Spanish war of 1740-42 resulted in some addi- 
tions to the provincial fleet. The assembly passed a 
resolution, December 13, 1740, to provide for the build- 
ing of two half galleys." John Yerworth, shipwright, 
did the work for £2,400 currency, and £600 more was 
appropriated to fit them out.^ From the places at which 

1 statutes, II, 607-609. They are called scout canoes in this act, 
but in subsequent acts are termed scout boats. 

« Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 506, X, 24, 344 ; Statutes, III, 538- 
539. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVI, 205, XXXVII, 108, 408. 

* Statutes, III, 180-181. 

^Ibid., IV, 68, 202; Com. House Journals, Ms., XVII, 244. 

« Com. House Journals, Ms., XIV, 39. 

Ubid., 234-235. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 189 

they were stationed, they were known respectively 
as the Charleston galley and the Beaufort galley. They 
formed part of the fleet sent to Georgia in 1742 to aid 
in repelling the invasion of the Spaniards from St. 
Augustine. In this emergency, an embargo was laid 
upon all the ships in Charleston harbor and many of 
them were pressed into servdce.^ The Beaufort galley 
and the Flamhorough man-of-war were ordered to pro- 
ceed to Georgia at once.^ The Charleston galley, then 
lying at Dorchester, was hastily brought down and fitted 
for use.' Volunteers were called for and bounties were 
offered. Finally, press warrants were issued and sea- 
men were compelled to serve. A day of fasting and 
prayer was appointed.* The fleet, which sailed July 
18, 1742, under the command of Captain Charles Hardj' 
of His Majesty 's ship, the Rye, was the largest that the 
province ever had under sail at one time. It was com- 
posed partly of royal, partly of provincial vessels. Of 
the king's ships of war there were the Rye, Captain 
Hardy, twenty-two great guns, one hundred and sixty 
men; the Flamhorough, Captain Hamor, twenty-two 
great guns, one hundred and fifty men; a swift sloop, 
Captain Bladwell, eight great guns, twelve swivel, 
ninety men; and the Hawk sloop, eight great guns, 
twelve swivel, ninety men. The provincial ships and 
vessels were the Success, Captain Thompson, twenty- 
two great guns, twelve swivel, one hundred and ten 
men; the brig Carolina, Captain Murray, ten great 

J Puilic Records, Extra, Ms., Ill, 69. 

2 Ibid., 70. 

3/fcwZ., 65, 69, 82-83, 85. 

*Ibid., 85, 91-92, 108-109. 



190 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

guns, ten swivel, seventy men ; the prize snow, St. Juan 
Baptista, Captain Barrett, ten great guns, twelve swivel, 
eighty-five men ; the Charleston galley. Captain Lyford, 
six great guns, ten swivel, sixty-five men; the Beaufort 
galley, Captain Gibson, eight great guns, sixty men ; the 
schooner Ranger, Captain Davis, twelve great guns, 
twelve swivel, eighty men; a sloop. Captain Chapman, 
ten great guns, ten swivel, eighty-two men; and a 
schooner, Captain Braddock, six great guns, twelve 
swivel, fifty men. Altogether there were one hundred 
and forty-four large guns, one hundred and two swivel, 
and one thousand and ninety-two men.^ 

On account of contrary winds the fleet did not reach 
St. Simon 's Island until the 26th.- General Oglethorpe 
complained bitterly of the delay of the South Caro- 
linians and declared that they did not leave Charleston 
until after they had received news of the final defeat 
of the Spaniards.^ Still, it seems hardly possible that 
they would have gone to the expense of fitting up and 
sending out such a large fleet unless it was to be used 
for some purpose. Perhaps it was their intention to 
follow up the victory by an offensive move on St. 
Augustine. As a matter of fact Captain Hardy had 
barely reached St. Simon's when he sent word to 
Charleston of the repulse of the Spanish and of his 
intention to pursue them.' Instead of doing so, he 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., Ill, 124. The Flamborough man-of-war 
and the Beaufort galley returned to Charleston July 17, and the whole 
fleet set out on the following day. Ibid., 104, 130. 

2 Ibid., 130. 

3 Oglethorpe Letters, Collections of Georgia Hist. Soc, III, 125, 139. 
* Public Records, Extra, Ms., Ill, 125-126. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 191 

returned to Charleston, on July 30, with all of his fleet 
except the two galleys. The reasons alleged for his 
change of plan were that the wind was unfavorable 
and that he thought it better to return and protect the 
Carolina coast. ^ Upon the council 's taking him to task, 
Hardy very curtly replied that he was answerable to 
no one in South Carolina for his behavior and that he 
intended to do as he pleased-^ 

Captain Frankland of His Majesty's ship the Rose 
having arrived from the Bahamas on August 3, the fleet 
was placed under his command and again ordered out." 
Nothing of importance was accomplished, however, and 
the entire armament returned to Charleston early in 
September.^ 

The provincial section of the fleet was at once dis- 
banded, as most of the vessels were merchantmen which 
had been pressed into service. The crews of the two 
galleys were reduced to ten men each and they were 
stationed at Beaufort until the middle of November. 
Captain Lyford continued in command of the Charles- 
ton galley, while Captain David Cutler Braddock took 
Captain Gibson's place on the Beaufort galley."^ 

The crews were soon increased to a captain, gunner, 
boatswain, and twenty-eight men each. The Charles- 
ton boat returned to its station, and was kept in the 
public service until its destruction in the harbor by a 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., Ill, 127. 

2 Ibid., 131-134. 
3/6id., 135-138. 
* Ibid., 189. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., XVllI, 63, 754. 



192 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

squall on the morning of April 8, 1744.' The Beaufort 
vessel was put out of commission and its men dis- 
charged, December 25, 1747, in consequence of a pre- 
sentment by the Charleston grand jury that its further 
maintenance was an unnecessary expense to the public. ^ 

Independent Companies 

The province was further protected by independent 
companies of troops paid by the home government, and 
usually sent out from England. In May, 1721, a com- 
pany consisting of ninety-four men came over with 
Governor Nicholson.^ They were stationed tempo- 
rarily at Port Royal, while Fort King George was 
being erected near the mouth of the Altamaha river. ^ 
By October, work on the buildings had so far pro- 
gressed that two officers and forty-five men were trans- 
ferred there.^ The remainder of the company followed 
them early the next year. The barracks at Port Eoyal 
were torn down and removed to the new outpost.^ 
Many of the men died in becoming acclimated and Gov- 
ernor Nicholson was soon under the necessity of send- 
ing to England for recruits.'' 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XIX, 366; Council Journals, Ms., XI, 
195, 253-257. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXI, 156, 403, XXII, 733, XXXIII, 
681; Council Journals, Ms., XV, 63, 82. 

^Public Records, Ms., IX, 45, 61; Public Records, Extra, Ms., 1, 
Part I, 93. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 519. 

^Public Records Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 129. 

^ Ibid., 193; Council Journals, Ms., II, 4. 

' Public Records, Extra, Ms., 1, Part I, 193 ; Corn. House Journals, 
Ms., VI, 87. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 193 

Fort King George was destroyed by fire in January, 
1726.^ Provision was then made for the construction 
of temporary barracks and the troops remained there 
until September, 1727. Then, on the order of the gen- 
eral assembly, they were again sent back to Port 
Royal. ^ The Beaufort people complained that they 
destroyed the woods and stole everything they could 
lay hands on. Nevertheless they were kept there until 
removed to Georgia in 1736.^ 

There were no independent troops in the province for 
several years thereafter. Finally, on June 3, 1742, the 
assembly drew up a petition to be presented to the king. 
After stating that the French had erected a chain of 
forts from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico and pointing 
out the danger to which the province was thus exposed, 
they begged His Majesty to send out three companies, 
to be stationed at Forts Johnson, Moore, and Fred- 
erick, and to be subject to the orders of the governor.* 
In a committee report adopted about the same time, the 
assembly agreed to give some additional pay to the 
officers and men, provided they were placed under the 
sole direction of the governor and stationed at the posts 
mentioned in the petition.^ 

Attorney-General James Abercrombie and Captain 
William Livingstone offered their services in soliciting 
the petition without expecting any allowance or re- 

1 Piihlic Records, Ms., XI, 287. 
■Ubid., XII, 239; Council Journals, Ms., IV, 65. 
^Council Journals, Ms., IV, 171, 198, VI, 202. 
* Com. House Journals, Ms., XVII, 454-4.59. 
= Ibid., 395-396. 

13 



194 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

ward.^ A few months later they were joined by 
Colonel Alexander Vanderdussen, whose private affairs 
called him to London.^ Owing to the amount of red 
tape in the British official system, it was three years 
before the petition was taken under serious considera- 
tion. Finally, it was decided to send over the three 
companies under the command of Vanderdussen, who 
was commissioned lieutenant-colonel and captain of one 
of the companies.^ The Gazette of January 25, 1746, 
announced that Vanderdussen and Captains Pascal Nel- 
son and Robert Hudson had arrived on the transport 
Pelican, three days before, with sixty recruits and non- 
commissioned officers. The remainder of the men 
were to be raised in the northern colonies, whither re- 
cruiting officers had already been sent. 

The assembly at once resolved to erect barracks in 
Charleston and to enlarge those at Fort Johnson for the 
use of the troops.* One company was stationed at Fort 
Frederick, Port Royal, another in Charleston, and the 
third was divided between Fort Johnson and Fort 
Moore.^ The muster rolls on January 1, 1748, showed 
that Captain Nelson's company contained one hundred 
and two officers and men, Colonel Vanderdussen 's one 

1 Council Journals, Ms., VIII, 77-80. 

2 Ibid., 263-264; Public Records, Ms., XX, 597. 

» Council Journals, Ms., XIV, Part II, 47. Col. Vanderdussen seems 
to have made a good impression in London, for he was appointed a 
member of the council, May 28, 1746. Public Records, Ms., XXII, 160- 
161. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., XXI, 314-316. 

^Public Records, Ms., XXII, 276. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 195 

hundred and twelve, and Captain Hodgson 's ' ninety- 
one. The total amount expended by the province as 
additional pay for the year 1747-48 was £7060:10:6.^ 

One of the companies was disbanded in 1752, ^ but 
was evidently reorganized shortly afterwards. Early 
in 1754 one hundred men were taken from the Charles- 
ton barracks and sent to Virginia. * The exact date 
of their return cannot be ascertained, but in 1759 all 
three companies were in the province.' 

In a letter to the Earl of Halifax, dated April 13, 
1764, General Gage stated that the three independent 
companies in South Carolina had just been disbanded 
and their place taken by three companies of the first 
batallion of the Royal American Regiment. The pres- 
sure from the French and Spanish having been re- 
moved, the South Carolinians were no longer glad to 
see British troops and refused to give them the extra 
pay and supplies which they had voted to the inde- 
pendent companies.'' These men were under the com- 
mand of Captain Richard Phillips.^ Regular troops 
were stationed in the province from time to time until 
the Revolution, but they were no longer welcome and 
only on rare occasions did the assembly condescend to 
give them any assistance.^ 

1 Probably the Captain Hudson mentioned in the Gazette. Hodgson 
is more likely the correct form. 

'^ Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIII, 14(5-148. 

3/fcid., XXVII, 415. 

Ubid., XXIX, 309-310, 450-451; Public Records, Ms., XXVI, 10. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIV, 74. 

6 Netc York Col. Doc, VII, G19. 

'-S'. Car. Gazette, No. 1600, September 7, 1765. 

^Public Records, Ms., XXXI, 413. 



196 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Coast Defenses 

The first colonists had no sooner settled on the west 
bank of the Ashley than they began to construct forti- 
fications. Governor West wrote to Lord Ashley, March 
2, 1671, that thirty acres had been cleared and palisades 
erected to protect the settlement from* the Indians/ 

In 1680, the colony moved across to the neck of land 
between the Ashley and Cooper rivers. The town as 
then laid out consisted of a narrow strip of land along 
the Cooper river front, bounded on the west by the 
present Meeting street, and on the north and south by 
creeks extending along what are now Market and Water 

streets. 

The' earliest statutes on the subject of fortifications 
are lost. Walls and trenches were at once constructed, 
but they were doubtless very weak and had to be fre- 
quently repaired. When Governor Archdale came out 
in 1695, he was instructed to fortify the town and grant 
it a charter. The work then begun was continued by 
his successors, Deputy Governor Blake and Governors 
Moore and Johnson. In 1704, the fortifications con- 
sisted of six bastions, two half -moons or ravehns, and 
a line of palisades and trenches. On the Cooper river 
side were Craven's bastion, at the extreme northeast 
near the foot of the present Market street; a half -moon 
near the end of Broad street; Granville's bastion just 
north of the creek that ran through Water street; and 
Blake's bastion on an island at the mouth of the creek. 
Along the northern bank of the creek a line of palisades 

1 Shaftesbury Papers, 8. Car. His. 8oc. Col., V, 267. 

2 J. J. Pringle Smith in Charleston Year Book, 1880, 242-243. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 197 

and entrenchments extended to Meeting street at its 
intersection with Tradd, up Meeting to the neighbor- 
hood of Cumberland, and thence across to Craven's 
bastion at the Market street wharf. At the intersection 
of Church street and Stoll's alley was Ashley's bastion; 
of Tradd and Meeting, Colleton's bastion; of Broad 
and Meeting, Johnson's covered half-moon; and at the 
extreme northwest, at the corner of Cumberland and 
Meeting, Carteret's bastion.^ 

The walls were evidently very weak, for an act of 
November 4, 1704, stated that some evil-disposed per- 
sons had been climbing over and breaking them down. 
A penalty of fining or whipping was provided for all 
who scaled the walls or went down into the trenches.^ 
As a result of this weakness, repairs had continually 
to be made. Laws for that purpose were enacted in 
1707, 1714, 1719, 1721, 1725, and at various other times. ^ 

In addition to the walls, moats, and bastions, Charles- 
ton was further protected by a fort at the entrance to 
the harbor. Built in 1708 at the extreme east end of 
James's Island, it was at first known as the fort on 
Windmill Point, but was later called Fort Johnson. A 
guard of two officers and twelve men was stationed 
there.^ 

The town soon began to expand beyond the walls, 

1 Oldmixon in Carroll, His. Col. of 8. Car., II, 448 ; McCrady, S. Car. 
under Prop. Govt., 341-342; Maps in McCrady, frontispiece, and Charles- 
ton Year Book, 1880, op, 242, 1884, frontispiece, 1886, op. 280; Map of 
Charleston printed by Walker, Evans, and Cogswell Co., 1895. 

2 Statutes, VII, 36-37. 

^Ibid., 43-47, 60-65, 65-71, 72-73, III, 250. 
*Ibid., II, 328, 333-330. 



198 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

especially toward the south and west. There was little 
or no attempt made to extend the limits of the fortifica- 
tions, however, until after the Spanish war of 1740-42. 
A watch-house was erected in Wliite Point Garden at 
an early date, and, in 1708, intrenchments were thrown 
up along the point for purposes of defense.^ 

The next move was made in January, 1736, when 
Gabriel Bernard, a European engineer, was taken into 
the sei-vice of the province.^ In accordance with his 
recommendations, there was passed, May 29, 1736, ' ' An 
Act for repairing the old and building of new Fortifica- 
tions for the security and defense of this Province from 
attacks by Sea, and for appointing Commissioners for 
carrying on such works: and for continuing New 
Church Street and Little Street to Ashley River. "^ 
As this law has not been preserved, we can only infer 
some of its provisions from the title and from various 
committee reports. Bernard was employed as engineer 
at a salary of seven hundred pounds per annum. 
Church street was continued from Vanderhorst creek 
(Water street) to South Battery. A curtain line of 
brick or stone was to be constructed along the bay, and 
the front between White Point and Vanderhorst creek 
filled up.^ Very little was done under this act beyond 
the erection of a battery in White Point Garden at the 

1 statutes, II, 328. 

i Council Journals, Ms., VI, 170-171, 317. Tradition says that he 
was an uncle of Rousseau. Charleston Year Book, 1880, 255-256. 

' Statutes, III, 436. Title only. 

* Council Journals, Ms., VI, 317, VII, 11; Com. House Journals, Ms., 
IX, 554-555. There was a bridge across the creek erected by Colonel 
Vanderhorst. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 199 

foot of Church street, which was called Broughton's 
battery in honor of the lieutenant-governor.^ 

The Carolinians, as we have seen, were badly fright- 
ened in the summer of 174!2 by an incursion of the 
Spaniards into Georgia. On July 7, the assembly re- 
solved to provide means for putting Charleston in the 
best possible posture of defense. Colonel Othniel 
Beale was employed to draw up plans for fortifying 
the southern and lower eastern portions of the town. 
Fortifications were hastily constructed of cedar posts 
from Vanderhorst creek (Water street) to Broughton's 
batteiy, perhaps a little to the west of the present East 
Battery, and from there ' ' to the point at the landing on 
Conseiller's creek," probably near the foot of Gibbes 
street. Altogether about six thousand pounds were 
expended.^ 

As soon as the immediate danger was over, the zeal 
of the assembly perceptibly cooled. After making com- 
plaints of the heavy expense, they finally refused out- 
right to make any further appropriations until a capable 
engineer could be secured to draw up plans. Gover- 
nor Glen was requested to send to the Bahamas for 
engineer Bruce.^ This was done, and Captain Bruce 
arrived in Charleston early in January, 1745. After 

1 1 can find no direct evidence that this batteiy was constructed in 
1736-37, but we may infer as much from the fact that it is often men- 
tioned in the journals after, but never before, that date. Furthermore, 
its name would indicate that it was erected during the administration 
of Lieutenant-Governor Broughton, 1735-37. 

^Council Journals, Ms., VIII, 143-144, 378, X, 146-147, 152-153, 
167-168, 236, XI, 207, 260, 269-270; Public Records, Ms., XXI, 17-28. 

3/6id., XI, 388. 



200 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

looking round for a few days, lie made a report to the 
governor and council calling attention to some weak 
points in the defenses which had hitherto been over- 
looked. He said that Charleston was strongly defended 
by nature on all sides except the northern, and sug- 
gested that the neck should be fortified at once. The 
bar was a great security and Fort Johnson commanded 
the usual entrance to the harbor. There was another 
entrance, however, by way of Hog Island creek. To 
protect this he recommended the erection of a battery 
on the marsh land opposite the curtain line, to be in 
the shape of a horseshoe with the open end toward 
Charleston.' The report was favorably received, and 
Captain Bruce drew up two plans for a citadel, to be 
located on the upper neck midway between the Ashley 
and the Cooper. One was for a large citadel, 4,592 feet 
in circumference with four bastions, the other for a 
smaller one, 3,760 feet in circumference with two bas- 
tions and two demi-bastions.^ These plans had to be 
given up as the expense was greater than the province 
could bear.^ 

The recommendations made in the report were, how- 
ever, strictly adhered to. An act, ratified May 25, 
1745, ordered the commissioners of the fortifications to 
cut a moat through land and marsh from Craven's bas- 
tion to the Charleston workhouse, said moat to be thirty- 
six feet wide, as deep as possible, and commanded by 
one or two bastions. On the marsh south of Hog Island 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XIV, 88-90. 
Ubid., 127-128. 
"Ibid., XIII, 250. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 201 

creek— the site of Castle Pinckney— there was to be 
erected a horseshoe battery of not more than sixteen 
cannon. The total expense was estimated at £20,000 
currency, to be paid out of the fortification fund. As 
there was not enough money on hand belonging to that 
fund £20,000 in fortification orders were to be issued, 
receivable in payment of all duties appropriated for 
fortifications. ^ 

Work was begun at once. The commissioners of the 
fortifications reported, February 22, 1746, that the moat 
and rampart across the neck were almost completed. 
The law had provided for not more than two bastions, 
but they regarded these as insufficient and erected three. 
Four or five were really needed.^ The assembly ap- 
proved the work and resolved that two more bastions 
or ravelins should be constructed, one of them at the 
high road, that is at King street.^ 

As near as we can judge from the limited data at 
hand, this line of fortifications extended from Market 
street wharf to the marshes of the Ashley river, striking 
the present Colonial lake about midway between Queen 
and Beaufain streets. King street was crossed at Clif- 
ford, and Mazyck at Magazine, the workhouse being on 
the southwest corner of Mazyck and Magazine. 

The horseshoe battery on the marsh was probably not 
erected at this time, as the expense of the other work 
was so great. Its estimated cost was four thousand 
pounds.* 

I statutes, III, 653-656. 

!^ Council Journals, Ms., XIV, Part II, 27-29. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXI, 357. 

*Ihid., XXVII, 439; Council Journals, Ms., XV, 158. 



202 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

For the next few years little was done beyond keep- 
ing the fortifications in repair. This work was en- 
trusted to a special board of commissioners containing 
some eight or ten members. With the approbation of 
the governor and council, they were empowered to make 
contracts and purchase lands for erecting forts and bat- 
teries in such places as might be necessary. There was 
a special fund at their disposal derived from an extra 
import duty on rum, Madeira wine, sugar, molasses, and 
a few other articles. It varied in amount from £7,000 
to £9,000 per annum until 1751, when the general duty 
act fixed it at £5,000.' 

Governor Glen looked upon the appointment of such 
commissioners as an encroachment upon his duties as 
chief executive. He attempted to destroy the board 
gradually by refusing to fill vacancies as they occurred. 
A message from the assembly, dated January 23, 1752, 
called his attention to the ruinous condition of the forti- 
fications and urged him to complete the board at once. 
No attention was paid to this, nor to another message 
of the same character which was sent up on March 11. 
Finally, a third message was sent on April 29, com- 
plaining tliat their requests had been disregarded and 
again urging that the vacancies should be filled. They 
stated further that they had heard that there were over 
twelve thousand pounds in the fortification fund, and 
recommended that it should be used to repair Forts 
Frederick and Johnson.^ 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XV, 158; Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVI, 
61; Public Records, Ms., XXV, 110; Statutes, III, 749. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, 139-140, 233, 400-401. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 203 

In liis reply, made a few days later, Glen called atten- 
tion first to the weak condition of the fortifications, not- 
withstanding the great amount of money that had been 
expended on them. Before beginning repairs, a skillful 
engineer should be called upon to draw up plans, and 
lie suggested that there was now such a gentleman in 
the province whom they could employ. Coming to the 
request to fill up the vacancies on the board, he declared 
that such establishments as commissioners of fortifica- 
tions were an encroachment on His Majesty's authority, 
and that he would make no appointments until he had 
consulted with his council.^ 

The skillful engineer referred to by the governor was 
Mr. William Gerald De Brahm, formerly a captain en- 
gineer in the service of the emperor Charles VI, but 
at that time a resident of Georgia.^ He was highly 
recommended by Count Seckendorf, under whom he had 
served.^ With the advice of his council. Glen had sent 
to Georgia for him to come over and draw up plans for 
repairing the fortifications. 

The assembly refused to consent to the employment 
of De Brahm on the ground that it would be unsafe to 
allow a foreigner to sound the channel and make plans 
of the fortifications. As for the vacancies on the board 
of commissioners, they expressed surprise that the gov- 
ernor should dare to say that a law of the province 
encroached on His Majesty's prerogative. At any rate, 

iCorfi. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, 434-440. 
2S. Car. Gazette, No. 1141, May 6, 1756. 
» Public Records, Ms., XXV, 120. 



204 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the law was in force until repealed by the king and 
could not legally be dispensed with by the governor.^ 

Two days later, that is on May 16, the assembly ad- 
journed to November 21. The province was visited by 
a violent hurricane, on September 15, which destroyed 
houses and bridges, entirely demolished the fortifica- 
tions, and caused considerable loss of life.- The as- 
sembly was hastily called together to take measures for 
the relief of the sufferers. 

The necessity of rebuilding the fortifications renewed 
the old controversy. The assembly insisted that the 
membership of the board of commissioners should be 
completed and that the work of reconstruction should 
begin at once. Glen, on the other hand, declared that 
the first step should be the employment of a competent 
engineer to draw up plans. The old fortifications had 
been built in piecemeal fashion and were always weak ; 
now was an opportunity to begin anew according to 
some definite system. The dispute dragged on for sev- 
eral weeks. The assembly declared that, if an engineer 
was necessary, they would prefer to employ Colonel 
Beale rather than a foreigner, whose recommendations 
were written in the French language. Glen yielded so 
far as to appoint the commissioners of the fortifications, 
but the dispute in regard to De Brahm caused a delay 
of nearly three years in the systematic repairing and 

I Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, 546-550. 

^liid., 581. For a detailed account of this storm, one of the sever- 
est ever known in Charleston, see note to Ramsey, His. of S. Car., II, 
320-326. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 205 

rebuilding of the fortifications.^ Meanwhile the com- 
missioners were spending the £5,000 per annum belong- 
ing to the fortification fund in making some haphazard 
repairs. The damage done by the hurricane, as well 
as the subsequent repairs, are described in a report of 
February 4, 1755. Craven's bastion (at Market street) 
had been almost entirely washed away, but had since 
been repaired, with the exception of the parapet, and 
now was equipped with eight twelve-pound cannon. 
The Half Moon (at Broad street) had a platform in 
fairly good condition, with five large and two small can- 
non lying upon it. At and around Granville's bastion 
(at Water street) were twenty-five new and twelve old 
cannon. A small bastion between Granville's bastion 
and Broughton's battery (probably at Church and 
South Battery streets) had been badly damaged, but 
the brick work had since been repaired and the founda- 
tion well secured with ballast stones. No parapet had 
yet been raised or platform laid. There were seventeen 
good cannon mounted and twelve old ones lying on 
skids. The bastion at the foot of King street had been 
in ruins since the hurricane. Tipper's bastion, a little 
to the west (about the end of Legare street), and the 
bastion near Conseiller's creek (about the end of Gibbes 
street) were in the same condition.^ The cedar pali- 
sades extending from Conseiller's creek round to Gran- 

1 Com. House Jourrmls, Ms., XXVII, 591, 611-612, XXVIII, 28-31, 
86-92, 108, 110-117, XXX, 531, 623-624; /8. Car. Gazette, No. 1141, May 
6, 1756; Public Records, Ms., XXV, 106-115, XXXII, 386. 

2 1 cannot ascertain the exact dates of the construction of these 
smaller bastions. They were probably erected in 1742-43 under the 
superintendence of Colonel Beale. 



206 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

ville 's bastion were almost all washed away, only a few 
posts being left between Tipper's and Conseiller's bas- 
tions. The rampart across the north end of the town, 
being built of loose sandy soil, had suffered very greatly, 
much of it having fallen into the moat alongside it. 
The bastions and ravelins along this line were also in 
a ruinous condition. In Fort Johnson the platform of 
the lower batteiy was destroyed and several heavy can- 
non lost. The upper fort also suffered some, but it 
had since been repaired and thirteen cannon were now 
mounted.^ 

Taking this report under consideration, the assembly 
forgot their old animosity toward De Brahm and re- 
quested Governor Glen to send for him. Arriving in 
Charleston early in April, 1755, he made a careful ex- 
amination of the town and harbor and then presented 
elaborate plans for fortifying the town on all sides. 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull states that the scheme was 
laid aside because it would have kept De Brahm long 
in the pay of the province, but would have been of little 
real value in defending the town.^ Captain De Brahm 
had to limit his energies to rebuilding the curtain line 
from Vanderhorst creek (Water street) around the bat- 
tery to the land of Thomas Shubrick, in the neighbor- 
hood of Gibbes street. It doubtless followed the line 
of Colonel Beale's cedar palisades. The work was 
eighteen months in building and over £30,000 was ex- 
pended.^ A report of a committee, dated March 10, 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXX, 197-203. 

2 Ibid., 433-434, 524-525 ; Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 386. 

3 Ibid., XXXI, Part I, 118-119; Public Records, Ms., XXVII, 61, 179. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 207 

1756, intimates that the method of construction was 
unsatisfactory. The walls, according to the report, 
consisted of fascines laid on the loose sand without any 
foundation or security against the waves and violent 
rains, except a few stones piled on the outside.^ 

Early in 1757, Governor Lyttleton wrote to Lord Lou- 
don, then in command of the British forces in America, 
asking for an experienced engineer. He immediately 
sent Captain Hesse to Charleston. Lieutenant-Colonel 
Bouquet, commander of the Royal American troops, 
who arrived in the province in June, 1757, was also 
well versed in engineering.^ Plans were formed for 
building a new line of defenses across the neck.^ By 
a majority of only two votes in the assembly, an act 
was passed, July 6, 1757, appropriating £44,300 cur- 
rency to carry on the work. Fortification orders were 
issued, to be redeemed gradually by additional import 
duties on wines, rum, biscuit, and flour.* All the 
orders were called in and destroyed by June 2, 1761, 
as a law was then enacted for repealing the clause for 
the levy of an additional duty,^ The work was par- 
tially carried out, but never completed.*' 

The peace of 1763 removed all danger from the 
French, Spanish, and Indians. Accordingly, cannons 
were dismounted, carriages housed, and the fortifica- 

1 Com,. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, Part I, 119. 

2 Ibid., XXXI, Part II, 143; 8. Car. Gazette, No. 1195, June 23, 1757. 

3 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 38G-387. 

*Ibid., XXVII, 285, 288; Statutes, IV, 45. £44,300 currency was 
equivalent to £6,328:11:5 sterling. 
i Statutes, IV, 150-151. 
^Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 387. 



208 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

tions generally neglected until the outbreak of the 
Revolution.^ 

Frontier Defenses 

Frequent invasions of the Spanish and Indians made 
the protection of the frontiers an absolute necessity. 
Some attention has already been paid to this subject in 
discussing rangers, independent companies, and scout 
boats. The first fort erected in the province was Fort 
Johnson, in 1708. That, being designed for the special 
l^rotection of the town rather than as a frontier defense, 
has been considered in connection with the coast de- 
fenses. The earliest frontier outposts were those estab- 
lished during and just after the war with the Yemassees 
in 1715. On March 7, 1716, the assembly resolved that 
garrisons should be established at seven ditf erent points. 
The largest of these were at Port Royal and at Savanno 
Town, which soon received the name of Fort Moore. ^ 
Fort Moore was situated on the eastern bank of the 
Savannah river, six miles below Augusta, in what after- 
wards became New Windsor township.^ Later in the 
year Fort Congrees— or Congarees— was erected on the 
Congaree river just below the present site of Columbia.i^ 
In 1716, forty-two men and officers were stationed at 
Fort Moore, twenty-seven at Port Royal,'^ and perhaps 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 387 ; Journal of a Voyage to Charles- 
town in So. Carolina by Pelatiah Webster in 1765, Southern History 
Association Publications, II, 135. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 27. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., XIV, 242-245; Public Records, Ms., XVIII, 
242. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 111, 151; MeCrady, 8. Car. under 
Royal Govt., 299. 
5 Ibid., Y, 166. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 209 

about the latter number at the Cougarees. As soon as 
the danger from the Indians passed away, the garrisons 
were reduced and the smaller posts abandoned. There 
were, in 1720, eight or ten small cannon at Port Eoyal 
and five or six at each of the other two forts.^ 

In 1721, Fort King George, or Fort Altamaha, was 
constructed by Colonel John Barnwell near the mouth 
of the Altamaha river on the extreme southwestern 
frontier. It w^as garrisoned by His Majesty's inde- 
pendent company, which came over with Governor 
Nicholson in 1721." As we have already seen, this 
fort was destroyed by fire in January, 1726. Tem- 
poraiy barracks for the troops were erected and they 
were kept there until September, 1727, when the place 
was entirely abandoned.^ 

The next fort erected was at a place called Pallacho- 
cola Old Town. It was probably situated on the 
Savannah river, just above the Florida Central and 
Peninsula railroad bridge, in what is now Effingham 
county, Georgia. A small palisade fort was con- 
structed under an act of February 23, 1723.^ A gar- 
rison was maintained there until 1735, when it was dis- 
missed and the fort was turned over to the Georgia 
authorities.^ 

1 Public Records, Ms., VIII, 68. 

2 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 17, 129, 193; Com. House 
Journals, Ms., V, 533-534, VI, 71-72, 80, 87; 8. Car. His. 8oc. Col., II, 
148. 

3 Public Records, Ms., XI, 287, XII, 239; Council Journals, Ms., 
IV, 65. 

* Statutes, III, 179-180. 
^Council Journals, Ms., VI, 70, 118-119. 
14 



210 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

Immediately after his arrival in the province in De- 
cember, 1730, Governor Johnson tried to induce the as- 
sembly to rebuild Fort King George. They voted £800, 
to be used jointly for that purpose and for constructing 
a new fort at Port Royal. The whole amount was ex- 
pended on the Port Royal fort, which received the name 
of Fort Frederick. Governor Glen says that it was 
injudiciously situated and poorly constructed, being 
made of oyster shells. By 1743 it had gone to ruin and 
was soon after abandoned.^ 

Fort Moore was at this time the most important out- 
post, though the gradual growth of Georgia rendered 
it less and less necessary. Its garrison was reduced 
in 1735 and 1739, temporarily increased in 1743, and 
again reduced in 1745.^ The walls and barracks were 
in a ruinous condition by this time, and, as war with 
the French was coming on, it was decided to rebuild. 
The work was completed in 1747 at a cost of £3,000.' 

The aggressions of the Cherokees soon led to a revival 
of activity in the building of forts. On October 14, 
1753, Governor Glen and a large detachment from His 
Majesty's independent companies set out for the lower 
Cherokee country, where they erected a fort, called 
Prince George in honor of the heir apparent to the 
British throne. The work was completed and they 
were back in Charleston by December 11,* The total 

1 Public Records, Ms., XV, 38, XVI, 73 ; Council Journals, Ms., IX, 
Part II, 60-61, XVI, Part II, 103. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., VI, 70, 101, 104, 116, VII, 181, IX, 1 art II, 
61-62, 72, XIV, 242-245, 248. 

3/6id., XV, 158. 

* S. Car. Gazette, No. 1018, December 17, 1753. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 211 

cost was £5,000 currency for the fort and £700 for a 
tract of several thousand acres of land which sur- 
rounded it.^ This fort was situated on the Keowee 
river in Pickens county, about fifteen miles northwest 
of the town of Pickens.^ 

Three years later a fort was constructed among the 
upper Cherokees and named Fort Loudon in honor of 
the commander of the British forces in America. The 
amount expended on it was about £7,000 sterling, of 
which the king furnished £1,000 and the province the 
remainder.' It was located in what is now Loudon 
county, Tennessee, on the southern bank of the Tennes- 
see river about thirty miles southwest of Knoxville. * 
During the war with the Cherokees, 1760-61, it was sur- 
rounded, its garrison of two hundred men forced to 
capitulate, and the works were destroyed.^ 

In the winter of 1758-59, work was begun on Fort 
Lyttleton near Beaufort, Port Eoyal." Some delay 
was caused by the Cherokee war, however, and it was 
not completed until late in 1762.^ It was intended to 
replace Fort Frederick, which, as we have seen, had long 
since gone to ruin. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIX, 177. For a discussion in regard 
to the e:.tent of this purchase, see McCrady, 8. Car. under Royal Govt., 
307. 

2 Lant rum, Col. and Rev. Hist of Upper 8. Car., 29; Mill, 8tatistical 
Atlas, in office of secretary of state, Columbia. 

'iCom. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, Part I, 47-48, 221-222, 227, 
Part II, 121; Puilic Records, Ms., XXVII, 318. 

♦Ranisay, Annals of Tennessee, 51. 

^Com House Journals, Ms., XXXIII, Part I, 311, Part II, 6. For 
a full account of this, see McCrady 8. Car. under Royal Govt., 347-349. 

« Statutes, IV, 98. 

"> Corn. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 80-81. 



212 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

The last fort erected during the colonial period was 
built 1765-66, on the Savannah river about forty-five 
miles above Augusta, opposite the mouth of the Broad 
river, in the lower part of what is now Abbeville county. 
It was constructed of stone at a cost of £1,000 sterling 
and was called Fort Charlotte in honor of Her Majesty, 

the queen.^ 

Indian Relations 

The Indians were in many respects the most powerful, 
the most dangerous, and the most persistent enemies 
with whom the Carolinians had to deal. As long as 
the French and Spanish had a foothold on this conti- 
nent, the primary object of provincial diplomacy was 
to secure the aid, or at least the neutrality of then- 
Indian neighbors. Moreover, a large and lucrative 
trade was carried on with them, which for a long time 
constituted one of the chief sources of wealth. Conse- 
quently, we find the colonists regulating trade, distrib- 
uting presents, and doing all in their power to preserve 
peace. A discussion of the general defenses of the 
province would, therefore, be incomplete without some 
reference to Indian affairs. 

The subject is entirely too extensive for anything like 
a detailed treatment, so a very brief outline is all that 
can be given. Wien the province was first settled, there 
were some twenty-five or thirty Indian tribes liymg 
wholly or partly within the present limits of the state. 
In 1765 there were only two, though a number of tribes 
in the surrounding country still gave occasional trouble. 

.Conu House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part I, 30, 58, 61, Part II, 
233; Public Records, Ms., XXX, 2oO-25I. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 2lS 

The Catawbas dwelt ou a reservation of fifteen square 
miles, situated in the upper valley of the Wateree or 
Catawba, in what is now York county. They had 
scarcely one hundred and fifty warriors. The lower 
Cherokees lived in northern Alabama and Georgia, 
mostly north of the Broad river, or the 34th parallel of 
latitude, in northwestern South Carolina, and in the 
southern portions of Tennessee and western North Car- 
olina. The upper Cherokee lands lay further to the 
north and west. In 1765 both branches could bring 
scarcely two thousand men into the field. The terri- 
tory of the upper Creeks extended from the Savannah 
river, between Broad and Little rivers, indefinitely to 
the westward. The lower Creeks lived in the valleys 
of the Chattahoochee and the Flint. In the whole 
Creek nation there were not more than two thousand 
men. The Chickasaws roamed the country to the west, 
and the Choctaws dwelt still further westward.^ 

The treatment of Indian affairs may be divided into 
two main periods: from 1670 to 1756 they were under 
the control of the provincial government; from 1756 to 
the Revolution, under the direct control of the crown. 

As early as 1677, dishonest traders had begun to cause 
trouble, and the Lords Proprietors issued an order for- 
bidding anyone to trade with the Indians except those 
who obtained special license from their board.^ Three 
years later Governor West and six others were ap- 
pointed a commission to determine differences and com- 

1 Hewatt in Carroll, His. Col. of 8. Car., 1, 494, and map, frontis- 
piece; Public Records, Ms., XX, 568-570; Brownell, Indian Races of 
America, 383-390. 

2»Sf. Car. His. Soc. Col, T, \01; Public Records, Ms., I, 60-61. 



214 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

plaints between the Indians and the English.' A law 
of 1691 limited traders to a narrow strip along the coast 
between the Savannah river and Winyaw Bay."^ 

In 1707, a board of nine commissioners was appointed 
to superintend Indian affairs. They were authorized to 
license traders and require them to give bond for good 
behavior. Thomas Nairne was employed as resident 
agent among the Indians, with power to settle all dis- 
putes among traders where the amount involved did not 
exceed thirty pounds, to arrest traders who were guilty 
of misdemeanors and send them to Charleston for trial, 
to take charge of the goods of persons who were com- 
mitted to prison, and to exercise the powers of a justice 
of the peace.' This method of controlling Indian af- 
fairs was in use from 1707 to 1716. It may be called 
the plural commissioner system. 

In 1716, the government decided to take the trade out 
of the hands of private individuals and carry it on for 
the public benefit. Accordingly, the commissioners 
were formed into a corporation, with a seal, and with 
power to hold property and to sue and be sued. They 
were given an absolute monopoly of the Indian trade, 
and were authorized to employ agents and factors. 
Trade was to be carried on from three points. Fort 
Moore, Fort Congaree, and Winyaw. Each commis- 
sioner received a salary of one hundred and fifty pounds 
a year and the treasurer thirty pounds extra. The net 
profits went into the public treasury. "^ 

' 8. Car. His. 8oc. Col, I, 103. 
2 Statutes, II, 66. 
sihid., 309-316. 
*Ibid., 677-680. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 215 

In consequence of numerous complaints, the Lords 
Proprietors declared this act null and void, July 22, 
1718.^ On March 20 of the following year, however, 
the assembly re-established the public trading corpora- 
tion, but did away with the monopoly feature. Private 
traders could do business, provided they obtained an 
annual license from the commissioners and gave a bond 
of five hundred pounds currency to treat the Indians 
justly. The commissioners were authorized to refuse 
licenses to persons whose presence among the Indians 
they regarded as detrimental to the public safety. 
There were several severe restrictions imposed on 
traders, which were almost prohibitive. Thus they 
were taxed ten per cent, on the value of their Indian 
purchases, presumably to keep up the three trading 
garrisons, were compelled to pay the clerk of the com- 
missioners a fee of eight pounds for drawing up a 
license, and were forbidden to trade with any Indians 
who lived within twenty miles of a garrison.^ 

The system of the public trading corporation, as we 
may call it, was kept up from 1716 to September 19, 
1721. Then the government went out of the trading 
business, and the old plural commissioner system was 
restored. Colonel William Bull and Messrs. George 
Chicken and John Herbert were appointed a board of 
Indian commissioners, at a salary of three hundred 
pounds each. They met at Charleston four times a 

1 S. Car. His. Soc. Col., I, 166. 

^Statutes, III, 86-96. These trading garrisons were the same as 
those provided for in the act of 1716, except that there was one at 
Pallachocola Old Town on the Savannah river instead of the one at 
Winyaw. 



216 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

year, in at least a two days' session, for the purpose of 
granting licenses, giving instructions, and taking bonds. 
They were instructed to visit the frontier trading posts 
twice a year and examine the garrisons and stores, to 
suspend garrison officers temporarily for misbehavior, 
to hear and determine complaints of Indians against 
traders, to adjudge damages, revoke licenses, and per- 
form various other duties. All traders, except those 
trading with a few neighboring tribes regarded as in 
the settlement, were required to come in person to 
Charleston once a year, when the board was in session, 
for the purpose of taking out licenses and giving bond 
to obey the instructions of the commissioners. The 
total license fees amounted to twenty-three pounds.^ 

It was apparently the intention of the government 
in passing this act to secure for South Carolinians a 
monopoly of the Indian trade. Virginia traders had 
for many years been carrying on traffic with the Creeks 
and Cherokees, who resided within the nominal limits 
of South Carolina. They were now put to the incon- 
venience of making an annual journey to Charleston, 
paying an exorbitant license fee, and giving bond to 
obey the orders of the Indian commissioners. Mr. John 
Carter, agent for Virginia in England, appeared before 
the Board of Trade and tried to secure a disallowance 
of the law. The whole question was referred by the 
Board to their special counsel, Mr. Eichard West, who 
made his report on October 25, 1722. He carefully 
analyzed the act and called particular attention to the 
high license fees and to the provision requiring all 

^ statutes, III, 141-146. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 217 

traders, Virginians as well as Carolinians, to make per- 
sonal visits to Charleston in order to take out licenses 
and give bonds to obey the orders of a board which 
was naturally prejudiced against them. Taking up 
its historical side, he stated that a similar law of 1711 
had been repealed by the proprietors at the command 
of the Board of Trade. The only ditference between 
the two was that the law of 1711 specifically mentioned 
Virginia traders, while that of 1721 merely compre- 
hended them in general terms. ^ 

In spite of this unfavorable report, the home govern- 
ment does not seem to have repealed the law, for its 
main features were continued in force for many years. 
An amendment of February 23, 1723, provided for the 
adoption of a new system of control, though various 
provisions, including that relating to licenses, remained 
unchanged. The board of commissioners was abol- 
ished and their powers and duties were conferred on 
the governor and any three members of his council. 
They were authorized to appoint a supervisor to visit 
the various trading garrisons twice a year and report 
their condition to the governor, council, and assembly.^ 

This system was kept up for only one year, when it 
was seen that too much of the time of the governor and 
council was being taken up with Indian affairs for them 
to attend to their ordinary duties. A law of February 
15, 1724, provided for the appointment of the Honor- 
able James Moore as sole commissioner of Indian 

1 Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 592-598. For the law of 1711, see 
Statutes, II, 357-359. 

'Statutes, III, 184-186. 



218 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

affairs, and vested him with all the powers and duties 
that had been conferred on the board of conunissioners 
by the act of 1721, and subsequently transferred to the 
governor and council by the amendment of 1723.^ 

With the exception of a few months in 1751-52, when 
the governor, council, and a committee of the assembly 
had charge of Indian affairs,^ the single commissioner 
system was ke^jt up until the crown assumed direct con- 
trol in 1756. Moore died a few days after his appoint- 
ment and was succeeded by Colonel George Chicken.'^ 
The subsequent commissioners were John Herbert 
(1731-1733), Tobias Fitch (1733-1734), William Drake 
(1734-1736?) Childermas Croft (1736-1747), William 
Pinckney (1747-1751, 1752-1756).^ 

After the settlement of Georgia, South Carolina re- 
ceived the same treatment in regard to the Indian trade 
which she had previously meted out to Virginia. A 
Georgia statute, passed early in 1736, required all per- 
sons trading with the Indians within the bounds of that 
province to take out licenses at Savannah. A number 
of South Carolina traders were expelled from the In- 
dian country and their goods were taken from them.^ 
The general assembly of South Carolina was called 
together by special proclamation on June 23 to con- 
sider the matter.'' Captain Othniel Beale, Captain 

1 statutes, III, 229-232. 
2/6i(Z., 754-755, 763-771. 

3 76id., 246; S. Car. His. Soc. Col., I, 279; Coutwil Journals, Ms., 
II, 262. 

* Statutes, III, 333, 372, 401, 482, 511, 525, 693, 754-755, 770. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 218. 

^Ibid., 34; Council Journals, Ms., VI, 276-277. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 219 

Peter Taylor, and Mr. Charles Pinckney from the 
assembly, and Mr. Hammerton from the council, were 
appointed a committee to go to Savannah and confer 
with General Oglethorpe.' A temporary agreement was 
finally reached, but the matter continued to be a subject 
of controversy for several years." The law officers of 
the crown decided in favor of Georgia. In an opinion 
of July 28, 1737, they declared that a colony could not 
legally exclude the people of other colonies from trad- 
ing with the Indians, but to require a license was merely 
a legal exercise of the power to regulate trade.^ 

The trade acts of South Carolina up to 1736 had 
gradually grown more and more stringent. The law 
of 1734, for example, provided for a license fee of 
eighty pounds currency and required the traders to 
jDay a duty of six pence on each skin or fur traded for. * 
Georgia offered more liberal terms, and many traders 
changed their headquarters to Savannah. Two laws 
were enacted in 1736 for reducing the license fee, tak- 
ing off the duties and impositions on trade, and indem- 
nifying the traders for certain fines, penalties, and 
forfeitures.'' The old restrictions were never again 
established, except for a short period in 1762-64, when 
trade with the Cherokees was taken into the hands of 
the public in order to preserve peace.*' 

The relations with the Indians constituted another 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 74, 78. 

2 Ibid., 296-300; See Harris, Memorials of Oglethorpe, 152-157. 
sChalmera, Colonial Opinions, 591-592. 

* Statutes, III, 330, 399-402. 

^Ibid., 448-449, 453. 

^Ibid., IV, 168-173, 188-189. - 



220 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

fruitful source of conflict between the governor and 
assembly. As usual, the lower house took advantage 
of their control over money bills to usurp functions 
purely executive in character. They were frequently 
encouraged to do so by the governor and council. 
Thus in 1727, when a war with the Yemassees was 
threatened, the assembly was asked to concur with the 
council in requesting Captain Edward Massey to re- 
move His Majesty's independent company from Fort 
King George to Port Royal. A few days later com- 
mittees from both houses met to confer in regard to 
the details of the proposed campaign.^ 

A still more serious encroachment was made in 1737. 
The Spaniards at St. Augustine were trying to incite 
the Indians to make war on the English. Six thousand 
pounds were appropriated for an Indian expedition, 
and provision was made that it should be paid by the 
treasurer ' ' on orders drawn for the same, by His Honor 
the Lieutenant-Governor, His Majesty's Honorable 
Council, and a committee of the Commons House of 
Assembly, jointly and not otherwise.'" Just before 
adjourning, on March 5, the lower house went still 
further and resolved that all the members of their 
house living in Charleston, and such others as might 
happen to be in town during the recess of the assembly, 
should join the governor and council in conference re- 
specting any emergencies that might arise and in draw- 
ing orders on the public treasurer.^ 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 573-576. 

2 Statutes, III, 484. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., VI, 481. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 221 

Having finished the business before them, the assem- 
bly adjourned from March 5 to May 16. On March 7 
a meeting was held in the council chamber, in which 
the members of the lower house took part, thirteen of 
them and two members of the council being present. 
These meetings were held at intervals until April 2. 
A number of orders were drawn on the ^treasurer and 
various resolutions were adopted in regard to the move- 
ment of troops, storing of provisions, and other matters 
purely military in character.^ The council acquiesced 
in this, though they subsequently declared that to 
allow the house a share in signing orders on the treasury 
was directly contrary to His Majesty's instruction 
directing the governor to take care that no money 
should be issued but by warrant under his hand." 

A third attempt on the part of the assembly to share 
in the administration of Indian affairs failed, but they 
succeeded in convincing the governor and council that 
nothing could be done without their assistance. On 
March 6, 1752, they requested Governor Glen to lay be- 
fore them, as soon as possible, all papers relating to 
Indian affairs which had not yet been communicated to 
their house. Glen replied that he had ordered such of 
the documents as might properly come before them to be 
copied and sent down. The assembly at once informed 
him that they wished to see all of them and to see the 
originals, not copies. On his refusal to send them, 
they resolved that they had a right to see all the papers, 
and that a reservation of any of them deprived the 

1 Council Journals, Ms., VI, 487-494. 

2 Ibid., XIII, 144-145. 



222 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

representatives of the people of tlie means of forming 
a true judgment of Indian affairs and prevented them 
from assisting the governor with their advice.^ 

A few days later His Excellency asked the assembly 
to provide for the expense of sending four or five 
Catawba Indians to an Indian conference in New York. 
They replied that they were in the dark in regard to 
Indian affairs and did not propose to take any steps 
until they had more information on the subject. Ac- 
cordingly, they had postponed the matter until the next 
meeting, when they hoped that the governor would lay 
the desired papers before them. Glen still refused to 
give up the papers, and Indian affairs were, as a con- 
sequence, sadly neglected. The assembly took occasion 
to observe that they were seldom informed in regard 
to such matters unless money was wanted to put into 
execution some of the governor's schemes.^ 

In the year 1756, the general control of Indian affairs 
was taken under the direct supervision of the crown, 
though the regulation of trade was still left to the col- 
onial governments until 1764. This move was due 
largely to the zeal and activity of Sir William Johnson 
of New York. Students of colonial history are familiar 
with the career of this remarkable man, and all have 
admired the consummate skill and ability with which he 
managed the New York Indians. Early in 1755, he was 

1 Cow. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, 207, 230, 232, 246-247, 255, 
267-268. 

'Ibid., 293-294, 417. During the previous July several Catawbas 
under the charge of Col. William Bull, Jr., had been sent to an Indian 
conference at Albany. Commissioners were also present from Massachu- 
setts Bay and Connecticut. A'. Y. Col. Doc, VI, 717-726. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 223 

commissioned by General Braddock, sole superintendent 
of the affairs of the Six Nations and their allies, and he 
soon succeeded in bringing order out of chaos.^ The 
success of his work, in contrast with the bungling mis- 
management of the old commissioners at Albany, natur- 
ally led the home government to take complete control. 
An outline of the plan adopted is to be found in a paper 
of January 9, 1756, entitled, "Some Thoughts upon the 
British Indian Interest in North America more particu- 
larly as it relates to the Northern Confederacy com- 
monly called the Six Nations, ' ' signed by Peter Wrax- 
all. Secretary for Indian Affairs, and addressed to Sir 
William Johnson. There was to be a distinct Indian 
service immediately under the king and supported by 
an established fund. Two persons of ability and in- 
tegrity, who were agreeable to the Indians, were to be 
commissioned by His Majesty to be superintendents 
of Indian affairs, one for the Six Nations and their 
allies, to reside in New York, and one for the southern 
Indians, to reside in South Carolina. They were to 
correspond regularly with the Board of Trade and re- 
ceive instructions from them. Indian affairs of a gen- 
eral nature were to be communicated to the commander 
in chief of His Majesty's forces in America; those 
affecting New York and South Carolina directly should 
be submitted to the governors of those provinces. The 
superintendents were likewise to receive instructions 
from the said commander in chief, or governors of New 
York and South Carolina, according to whether the 

1 Johnson Manuscripts in Doc. Hist, of 'Seic York, II, 391 ; New York 
Col. Doc, VI, 957-958, VII, 19. 



224 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

matters under consideration were general or local. 
They were to hold public meetings with the Indiaas, 
distribute presents, appomt mterpreters and agents, 
transact all business with the Indians, give each other 
regular advice of their proceedings, and conduct their 
administrations upon a uniform system. They were 
to be members of the council in their respective prov- 
inces.^ 

In accordance with this plan. Sir William Johnson 
was, in 1756, commissioned superintendent for the 
northern district, including all the provinces north of 
Virginia, and Mr. Edmund Atkin for the southern dis- 
trict, including Virginia, North Carolina, South Caro- 
lina, and Georgia.' In 1762 Atkin was succeeded by 
Captain John Stuart, whose success with his savage 
charges was second only to that of Sir William John- 
son.' It was largely due to his efforts that the southern 
Indians supported the mother country during the Eevo- 
lution. Sir William served as superintendent of the 
northern district until his death in 1774, when he was 
succeeded by his son-in-law. Colonel Guy Johnson, who 
also took an active part in organizing the Indians 
against the colonists.* 

The service was extended in 1764, the powers of the 
superintendents were increased, and trade was brought 
more closely under the supervision of the crown. ^ A 
plan for the future management of Indian affairs, 

iNeiD York Col. Doc, VII, 15-29, especially 26. 

2 Ibid., 35, 211-212, 574; Com. House Jounmls, Ms., XXXII, 223-224. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 307-308. 

^Doc. Hist, of :Sfeio York, II, 582-583; Neio York Col. Doc, VIII, 
passim. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 225 

drawn up by the Board of Trade in July of that year, 
contained forty-three articles. The superintendent of 
the northern district was to have three deputies, the 
superintendent of the southern, two. A commissary, 
an interpreter, and a smith were to reside in each of 
the southern tribes and at each northern trading post, 
and act under the immediate orders or directions of 
the superintendent. The superintendents were to con- 
duct all public affairs relative to the Indians. Gover- 
nors were forbidden to hold general meetings with the 
Indians without the concurrence of the superintendent, 
except in emergencies or when the superintendent was 
in a remote part of the district. In all matters of 
political importance relating to peace and war, pur- 
chase of land, etc., the superintendents were to advise 
and act in concert with the governors and councils in 
the various colonies within their districts. For this 
purpose each superintendent was made councilor extra- 
ordinary in every colony of his district. The superin- 
tendent or a deputy was required to visit each post 
or tribe in his district at least once a year in order 
to examine into the conduct of subordinate officials, 
hear and redress complaints, and make presents to the 
Indians. The commissaries were to act as justices of 
the peace, with power to decide summarily civil actions 
between traders or between traders and Indians in- 
volving not more than ten pounds sterling. Appeals 
to the superintendent or his deputy were allowed. 

Articles twenty-three to forty related to trade. 
Under certain restrictions, trade was to be free and 
open to all of His Majesty's subjects, provided the 

15 



226 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

rights of the Hudson Bay Company were respected. 
All colonial laws on the subject were declared repealed. 
Traders were to be licensed by the governor and coun- 
cil of the colony from which they intended to trade, 
and the license fee was to be not more than two shillings. 
They were to declare at what post or with what tribe 
they proposed to trade, and this was inserted in their 
licenses, which were renewed annually. No one could 
trade under a license, except the party named in it and 
his agents whose names were inserted on the margin. 
Licenses were registered in the secretary's office of the 
colony in which they were taken out, a fee of six pence 
being allowed for such entry. Traders were required 
to show their licenses to the commissary immediately 
on arriving at the post or in the tribe with which they 
intended to trade. Trade was to be conducted in ac- 
cordance with a tariff of prices settled from time to 
time by a conference of the commissary, traders, and 
Indians. The sale of ''rum or other spirituous liquors, 
swan shot, or rifled barrell'd guns" was forbidden. 
Standard weights and measures were kept at each town 
or trading post for use in settling disputes. 

The estimated expense of this plan was £20,000 ster- 
ling per annum, which was to be raised by a duty on 
Indian trade, either collected as an export duty on skins 
and furs or else made payable by the traders at their 
places of trade, as should be found most practicable and 
least burdensome.^ 

After a few years' trial, the home government found 
the system too expensive to be self-supporting. Either 

1 Penn. Archives, Hazard series, IV, 182-189. 



MILITIA AND DEFENSE 227 

they or the colonies would have to bear the burden if 
It was continued. Consequently, the control of trade 
was given back to the colonies in 1768, and the various 
deputies, commissaries, and interpreters in the pay of 
the crown were dismissed from service. Johnson and 
btuart were, however, still retained as superintendents 
with power to negotiate concerning boundaries of In- 
dian tribes, to renew ancient compacts, reconcile ditfer- 
ences and disputes, and hold interviews for various 
purposes. Each was to receive a salary of £1 000 per 
annum and £3,000 more for presents and other expenses 
£8 000^^'"'^'''''''^ ^^'^ ^''''''^^ expenses from £20,000 to 

J08-310 ' ' ^""'- ^'"'' '^"""^«^^' ^'■' xxxviii; 



CHAPTER VI 

Financial History 

The term Financial History is used in this chapter 
to include both the monetary system, or Financial His- 
tory in its narrow sense, and the revenue system, or 
what is technically known as Public Finance. Each 
of these admits of a two-fold treatment. There is, first, 
what may be called the statics of the subject. We may 
study the system as it existed without any special effort 
to discover the motive forces which produced it. This 
would satisfy the financier. It would let him know 
the character and amount of money in circulation at 
any particular time. It would inform him in regard 
to the sources and amount of public revenue and de- 
scribe the process of assessing and collecting taxes. 
But there remains a far more important phase of the 
subject, which we may call financial dynamics. The 
financial system is of interest to the student of history 
primarily because it helps to explain the constitutional 
development of the province— a development, by the 
way, which was almost identical with that taking place 
in Great Britain. The statement is often made that 
the liberties of Englishmen were purchased with 
money, that the House of Commons acquired its su- 
premacy through the control of the public purse. This 
is equally true of the province of South Carolina. The 

228 



FINANCIAL IIISTOKY 229 

thesis has already been advanced that the central fact 
in colonial history was the struggle between the popular 
and the prerogative elements in the government. An 
attempt has been made in previous chapters to indicate 
some of the various fonns in which this struggle pre- 
sented itself. But, just as in England, all other issues 
were subordinated to the money question. 

It has been found impossible to separate entirely the 
statics and the djmamics of our subject, though some 
effort has been made in that direction. The rather de- 
tailed treatment which follows, of the disputes over the 
issue of paper money and of the etforts of the assembly 
to control money bills, has been regarded as necessary 
to a proper appreciation of the constitutional history 
of the province. 

A. Monetary System 

At various times during the colonial period, the fol- 
lowing mediums of exchange were in use in South Caro- 
lina: produce, coin, legal tender bills of credit, limited 
legal tender public orders, tax certificates, and certifi- 
cates of indebtedness issued by the lower house. 

When the first settlers came over in 1670, they 
brought a few small English coins with them, which 
for a time constituted the only money in circulation. 
As most of these were soon drawn away through trade 
with England, some medium of exchange had to be 
devised to carry on business. One remedy was to make 
country produce a legal tender. An act of July 23, 
1687, provided that all debts might be paid in corn, 
peas, pork, beef, tobacco, and tar at certain fixed prices. 



230 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

unless the contract called for gold or silver or some 
particular commodity at a certain price.^ 

The deficiency of money was partially supplied by 
the various Spanish, Mexican, and Peruvian coins which 
were brought in by traders from the West Indies. 
Laws were enacted in 1683, 1691, 1695, 1697, 1700, 
and 1701, fixing their value in pounds and shillings.^ 
By the act of November 16, 1700, Mexican and Peruvian 
pieces of eight of thirteen pennyweight were rated at 
six shillings, half pieces being in proportion; double 
royals or reals at eighteen pence, singles and halves in 
proportion. All gold coins were rated at six shillings, 
six pence per pennyweight. The ratio between gold 
and silver was accordingly about 14.09 to 1. In this 
act the common custom was followed of placing a high 
valuation on the coins in order to draw them away from 
the neighboring colonies. The attempts of the various 
colonies to thus outbid one another became such an evil 
that Queen Anne issued a proclamation, June 18, 1704, 
fixing a value upon foreign coins and forbidding any 
one to receive them at a higher rate. In 1707 the proc- 
lamation was embodied in an act of parliament and 
penalties were provided for its violation.^ Paper cur- 
rency was introduced in 1703, and gold and silver soon 
ceased to be used, except in making foreign payments. 

1 statutes, II, 37. 

2 Ibid., V, 72-73, 94-95, 130, 163-164, 178. 

3 Statutes at Large, 6 Anne, chap. 30. The act stated that pieces 
of eight of 17 pennyweiglit and 12 grains weight had a bullion value 
of 4 shillings 6 pence, that is 54 pence. They were not to be valued 
higher than 6 shillings that is 72 pence. The ratio between sterling 
and proclamation money thus becomes fixed at 54 to 72, or 3 to 4. 
£100 sterling was equivalent to £1331/3 proclamation money. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 231 

It is practically impossible to estimate the amount 
of coin in the province at any time. Considerable 
sums seem to have come from the West Indies, but they 
were immediately exported. According to the report 
of a committee of the assembly, there was in the public 
treasury, on October 18, 1771, £59,520 : 2 : in gold and 
silver coin. This consisted of Spanish doubloons, 
Spanish milled dollars, Portuguese half Joannes, and 
English guineas.' 

To meet the expense of the expedition against St. 
Augustine, an act was passed, May 8, 1703, providing 
for the issue of £6,000 in bills of credit bearing interest 
at twelve per cent. This issue was to be redeemed 
within two years, £2,000 by direct tax, February, 1704, 
£2,000 more, February, 1705, and the remainder out 
of the funds arising from the duty act of May 6, 1703.^ 
Exchange being then at 1| to 1, this amount was 
equivalent to £4,000 sterling.^ 

Instead of redeeming the bills according to law, the 
assembly permitted the taxes and duties levied for that 
purpose to be spent in fortifying Charleston and other- 
wise defending the province. The fiat money fever 
soon proved irresistible, and, as might have been ex- 
pected, the currency was rapidly inflated, and promises 

1 Com. House Jotirnals, Ms., XXXVIII, 571. 

2 Statutes, II, 200-212. 

'The following account of the currency up to 1740 is taken largely 
from " An Account of the Rise and Progress of the Paper Bills of Credit 
in South Carolina . . . ," sent to the Board of Trade by Lieutenant- 
Governor Bull, February 7, 1740. Public Records, Ms., XX, 214-247. 
Published in Statutes, IX, 766-780, also in Sound Currency, February 
15, 1898, Vol. 5, No. 4. 



232 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

of repayment were recklessly disregarded. The fol- 
lowing table will show the condition of affairs at the 
beginning of 1712: 

Issued by act of May 8, 1703 f 6,000 

July 5, 1707 8,000 

February 14, 1708 3,000 

April 24, 1708 5,000 

March 1, 1711 3,000 

Tuscarora bills, November 10, 1711 4,000 

Total issued £29,000 

Redeemed by act of February 14, 1708 £2,000 

March 1, 1711 1,000 

Redeemed by various acts or destroyed 6,000 

Total redeemed 9,000 

Total amount outstanding £20,000* 

The so-called Tuscarora bills consisted of £4,000, is- 
sued November 10, 1711, for the purpose of assisting 
North Carolina in the war with the Tuscarora Indians. 
They were to be redeemed by an additional duty on 
liquor and other merchandise. This left £16,000 out- 
standing, for the redemption of which no provision had 
been made. 

The province now adopted a very plausible scheme, 
which was usually known in colonial times as a land 
bank. By the bank act of June 7, 1712, £52,000 in bills of 
credit were issued, equivalent to $34,666:13:4 sterling. 
£16,000 were to go toward replacing the old bills, £4,000 
for contingencies, and the remaining £32,000 to be 
loaned at 12^ per cent, interest per annum for twelve 

1 statutes, II, 206-212, 302-307, 320-323, 324-327, 352-354, 366, IX, 
769. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 233 

years. The annual payments included interest and one- 
twelfth of the principal, so that by the end of the period 
the government would have recovered the original issue 
with a handsome profit, and the individual would be 
discharged from all further obligations. No individual 
could borrow less than £100 nor more than £300. Bonds, 
or mortgages on land and negroes, had to be given 
for double the amount borrowed, as security that the 
payments would be regularly made. In case any pay- 
ment was delayed for ten days, execution would be is- 
sued against the delinquent for the amount due. The 
bills were made full legal tender for all debts, and a 
penalty was imposed for refusing to accept them.^ 

By the close of 1712 there were in circulation the 
£52,000 issued by this act and the £4,000 of Tuscarora 
bills. Depreciation rapidly set in. By 1715 the ratio 
of currency to sterling was two to one. To prosecute 
the war against the Yemassees, £30,000 more were is- 
sued in 1715 and £20,000 in 1716. ^ Provision was made 
for redeeming these bills, but the funds were usually di- 
verted to other purposes. Numerous complaints hav- 
ing been made to the Lords Proprietors by London 
merchants who carried on trade with the province, in- 
structions were sent out forbidding the governor to give 
his assent to any act for the further issue of bills of 
credit or for diverting the funds appropriated to re- 
deem those already outstanding."^ 

No other emissions were made until after the over- 

• 1 statutes, IX, 759-7G5. 

'^Ibid., II, 627-6.33, 634-641, 662-676, IX, 770-771. 
Wuhlic Records, Ms., VI, 69, VII, 32-33, 156-157. 



234 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

throw of the proprietary government. Under the rev- 
olutionaiy regime there was an issue of £34,000 of what 
were known as rice bills, because they were to be re- 
deemed by a tax payable in rice, at the rate of thirty 
shillings per hundred. The rate of exchange had now 
risen to five to one.^ 

Royal government in South Carolina began with the 
arrival of Governor Francis Nicholson, May 23, 1721.2 
The people received him with extravagant joy, and the 
assembly gave up some of the advantages which they 
had gained during the proprietary period.^ Aside 
from this there was no change worthy of mention in the 
constitution of the province. Governmental powers 
were transferred from the proprietors to the king, 
though the former still retained their territorial rights 
until 1729. The machinery of government in the prov- 
ince itself remained unchanged. 

Nicholson was just the man to restore order after the 
excesses of the revolution. He had the benefit of a long 
experience in the colonial service, having presided for 
many years, either as governor or as lieutenant-governor 
over the provinces of New York, Maiyland, Virginia, 
and Nova Scotia. Another advantage was the aid and 
sympathy which he received from his council. Refer- 
ence has already been made to the fact that before 1760 
the council was for the most part composed of the lead- 
ing merchants and importers of Charleston. Repre- 

1 statutes, IX, 773. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 495. 

'For example, the repeal of the law of 1707 vesting the sole power 
of electing the treasurer, powder receiver, and other public officials in 
the lower house. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 235 

senting the creditor class, they foiiud it to their interest 
to ally themselves with the crown officials in opposition 
to the planter element in the assembly. Fortunately 
for the interests of the crown, the first ten years of 
royal government were characterized by a continual 
struggle over the issue of i^aper money. This was 
settled in 1731, and the land question became the chief 
issue for several years. On this subject the interests 
of council and assembly were the same and the relations 
between them became more harmonious. The bitter con- 
flict over the currency question, however, had made the 
members of the council very conservative. Throughout 
the whole colonial period, they were made to feel that 
it was only the strength of the crown which could save 
them from the fiat money schemes of the planters. Had 
the British government fully trusted these merchants 
and appointed them to positions of honor and trust in 
the province, they could have created a loyal element 
which would have afforded them good service in time 
of need. But this is exactly what they did not do. 
If a governor, or a chief justice, or a receiver of the 
quit rents was to be appointed, some second-rate office- 
seeker was sent out from England. This was done, too, 
in spite of the fact that there were scores of young men 
in Charleston, educated at Oxford and Cambridge, who 
were qualified to fill any office in the province. 

After this digression, let us come back to our discus- 
sion of the monetary system. The opening of the pe- 
riod of royal government brings us again to the dynam- 
ics of the subject. The first steps were in the direction 
of greater inflation. An act of September 20, 1721, pro- 



236 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

vided for the reissue of £15,000 in rice bills, which should 
have been destroyed according to law. Provision was 
made for calling in all of the said bills, however, at the 
rate of £4,000 per annum.^ At the beginning of 1723 
there were in circulation £8,000 in bank bills of 1712, 
and, it was estimated, £72,000 of the other issues. A 
law of Februaiy 23 provided for the printing of £120,- 
000— £80,000 to replace the old bills, and £40,000 as a 
new issue, to be turned over to the public treasurer to 
meet the regular expenses of the government. Of this 
amount, the £8,000 in bank bills were to be redeemed 
by June 17, 1724, in accordance with the bank act; 
£72,000 by an extra annual tax of £4,000 per annum, as 
provided for in the law of 1721 ; and the £40,000 by a 
tax of £5,000 per annum, beginning in 1738 and ending 
in 1745. All were made a full legal tender and a 
penalty was afBxed for refusing to receive them.^ 

This measure was not enacted without considerable 
opposition. On December 5, 1722, it was presented to 
the assembly by Benjamin Whitaker of the committee 
on ways and means, passed its first reading, and was 
sent to the upper house.^ 

On the following day, the merchants and traders of 
Charleston presented a long petition and memorial to 
the governor, council, and assembly. These documents 
were first read in the council and then sent down to the 
assembly. The petitioners humbly begged that the 
reasons offered in the memorial against the bill should 

1 statutes, III, 149-157, 219. 

''Ibid., 188-193. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 97, 100, 103. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 237 

be considered, and they asked to be given an opportunity 
to prove their allegations, in case any of them were 
doubted. The memorial took up the history of the 
currency from the first issue in 1703, considered the 
various acts increasing the amount, and called atten- 
tion to the bad faith of the general assembly in repeal- 
ing the several sinking fund acts before they could be 
put into operation. It further went on to speak of the 
depreciation of the currency at that time, and of the 
great injustice to the creditor class that would be 
caused by the emission of the amount proposed. This 
was signed by twenty-eight of the leading merchants 
of the province.' 

The house resolved itself into a committee of the 
whole to consider the memorial. On December 8, they 
adopted a series of resolutions to the effect that, having 
gone through all the laws relating to the paper cur- 
rency, they found that they had always been passed 
for the support of the public credit and the preserva- 
tion of the province, and that they were not enacted 
with any design to injure or defraud any person what- 
ever. They also affirmed ' ' that the aforesaid memorial 
is false and scandalous, and destructive to the true in- 
terest of this province, and is a base reflection on the 
preceding Parliamentary proceedings and a high in- 
dignity to the present General Assembly."" 

After the adoption of these resolutions, a motion was 
made and carried that the signers of the memorial 
should be taken into custody. The order was at once 

I Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 99-104. 
Ubid., 113. 



238 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

enforced by the messenger of the house. The im- 
prisoned merchants petitioned the governor and council, 
asking to be heard on the subject matter of their me- 
morial and of the bill. The council resolved that they 
should be allowed a hearing, according to the privileges 
of English subjects, but should then be returned into 
custody, so that the privileges of the commons might 
be preserved. The petition, together with this resolu- 
tion, was sent down to the assembly. That body at 
once informed the council that their action was a 
''breach of the privileges of this House, for since they 
stand committed by this House, they cannot be released 
for any time but by the said power that committed 
them." At the same time a message was sent to 
the governor couched in the same general language, 
but containing an argument that is suggestive of future 
claims. ''We are of opinion," ran the message, "that 
every petition against bills under consideration of the 
Assembly, especially such as concern money or supplies, 
ought to be first referred to and considered by this 
house where every inhabitant of this Province hath 
his representative, and in case the bill is passed with 
us, that then the petitioners may be heard before Your 
Excellency and His Majesty's Honorable Council." 
They went on to say that petitioning in a legal manner 
was the right of every English subject, but, at the same 
time, it was the undoubted right of the House of Com- 
mons to punish the petitioners for falsity, scandal, and 
insolence.^ 

> Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 113-114, 117-120. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 239 

On December 13 and 14, the several petitioners ac- 
knowledged their fault, confessed that their memorial 
was false and scandalous, and were dismissed from 
custody, after paying heavy fees to the clerk and mes- 
senger of the house.' 

The opposition of the council was equally futile. In 
a message of December 13, they declared that there was 
already enough currency in circulation to carry on the 
trade of the province, but, considering the recent losses 
by flood and the consequent inability of the people to 
pay all the taxes for the year, they were willing to con- 
fer with the assembly in regard to printing a limited 
number of bills.^ 

The commons consented to this, and a grand con- 
ference of both houses was held on the 4th, but no 
agreement could be reached. The council maintained 
that £80,000 should be issued to take the place of the 
old bills outstanding, and £30,000 additional for the 
support of the government. They suggested that no 
more should be issued than was absolutely necessary, 
for fear that the law might be disallowed in England.' 

The assembly claimed that at least £43,000 additional 
was necessaiy, and that, considering the miseries of 
the people, a law should also be passed making produce 
a legal tender. In reply the council said that they 
would not consent to the issue of more than £30,000 
extra, though the governor agreed to sign a legal tender 
produce bill.^ 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., VI., 121-126. 
s/bid., 122. 

'Council Journals, Ms., II, 137. 
^Ibid., 138-140. 



240 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Another subject of dispute was in regard to the choice 
of commissioners for stamping the bills. The lower 
house thought that five commissioners would be neces- 
sary, but finally agreed to the governor's suggestion 
that three were sufiicient. They selected Captain Wil- 
liam Dry, Major Thomas Hepworth, and a Mr. Smith. 
The council struck out Smith's name and inserted that 
of Henry Howser. To the objections of the assembly, 
they replied that they had an undoubted right to nomi- 
nate to office and proposed to exercise it. A deadlock 
was threatened, when the lower house, in their anxiety 
to secure an immediate passage of the bill, proposed 
that the governor should appoint the third commis- 
sioner. This was agreed to, and he appointed Howser.^ 

The council yielded on the question of the amount of 
currency to be issued, and, as already stated, the bill 
became a law on February 23. Being passed without a 
saving clause, it went into force at once, but like other 
measures it had to be sent to England for His Majesty's 
approval. This transferred the controversy to London. 
The Charleston merchants laid the whole matter before 
the Board of Trade and petitioned for a repeal.^ They 
were more successful here, for, on August 27, 1723, the 
Lords Justices in council, acting on the recommenda- 
tion of the Board of Trade, repealed both this law and 
that of September 20, 1721. Governor Nicholson was 
instructed to secure the immediate passage of an act 

to cancel the two issues.^ 

/ 

1 Council Journals, Ms., II, 221, 226-227, 236. This name is some- 
times spelled Houser. 

2 Public Records, Ms., IX, 179-204. 

Uiid., X, 125-127; Statutes, III, 193, IX, 775. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 241 

In accordance with this instruction, ' ' An Act for call- 
ing in and sinking the Paper Bills" was i^assed, Feb- 
ruary 15, 1724. The £55,000 which were issued under 
the two repealed laws were to be redeemed as follows : 
provincial customs duties, except those appropriated for 
the salaries of the clergy and for the building of the 
brick church in Charleston, were to be paid in these bills 
only, and, when received, they were to be burned every 
six months until all were destroyed.^ 

During the next six years, the planter element in the 
assembly directed all their efforts, first, to evade this 
sinking fund law, and secondly, to increase the paper 
cun^ency by securing new issues. 

Nicholson returned to England, May 17, 1725, and 
the government, according to instructions, devolved upon 
Arthur Middleton, the eldest member of the council.^ 
Middleton's task was a difficult one. Nicholson had 
put the new royal government into operation and di- 
rected its destinies for four years. He possessed the 
advantages of a wide experience in colonial administra- 
tion and of the strong feeling of loyalty among the 
people which followed the downfall of proprietary rule. 
Although his administration was on the whole success- 
ful, he was involved in several serious disputes with 
the assembly. It might have been foreseen, then, that 
Middleton would inevitably fail, since he had neither 
the prestige of a royal commission nor the advantage of 
such a feeling of loyalty among the people. Though em- 
barrassed by his record in favor of the people's rights 

^statutes, III, 219-221. 
^Council Journals, Ms., Ill, 1. 
16 



242 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

during the revolution of 1719, lie now set himself upon 
a high pedestal as guardian of ''His Majesty's Royal 
Prerogative,"^ regarding it as his duty to uphold the 
rights and privileges of the crown, to resist obstinately 
all encroachments, and to make no compromises. The 
commons house, on the other hand, remembering his 
previous career and believing that as a native ot the 
colony he would naturally side with them, thought this 
a capital opportunity to make substantial gams and to 
carry out their long cherished desire of further increas- 
ing the amount of paper money in circulation 

The assembly adjourned from May 15 to May 26. 
Messrs. John Lloyd, William Rhett, and Samuel Eve- 
leigh were selected as a committee to draw up during 
the recess a proper scheme concerning the best method 
for regulating the currency of the province. The plan, 
entitled, "A scheme for preserving the present paper 
currency of £100,585 ^ and to add the sum of £40,000 
to make the whole equivalent to £20,000 sterling, which 
sum there is an absolute necessity should be issued to 
support and carry on the trade of the province " was 
introduced on the first day of the new session, and a bUi 
was ordered to be brought in in accordance therewith. 
The whole amount was to be loaned on landed security 
at ten per cent, interest.^ This scheme was practically 

iThis expression occurred in nearly every message which he sent 

to the assembly. . , 

2 This is apparently a low estimate. £120,000 had been issued under 
the act of February 23, 1723. It is by no means lilcely ^hat a. much 
as £20,000 had been redeemed under the smkmg fund actoi February 
15, 1724. Indeed, only £13,500 had been redeemed by 1/30. Statutes, 

IX, 778. 

3Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 209-211. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 243 

the same as that embodied in the bank act of 1712. 
Tlie plan was sent up to the council, together with a 
message asking them to concur in passing such a bill 
with a clause suspending its operation until approved 
by the home government. President Middleton, in re- 
ply, called attention to a petition recently sent to the 
king for permission to establish a land bank, and said 
that the passage of such a law without leave first being 
obtained would be to forestall His Majesty's judgment. 
In conclusion he declared that it was beyond his power 
to assent to such an act and cited the twenty-ninth 
article of Governor Nicholson's instructions, which 
provided that the eldest councilor should administer 
the government in the absence of the governor and 
lieutenant-governor, but should forbear "to pass any 
acts, except such as were immediately necessary for 
the peace and welfare of the province, without a par- 
ticular order from the king. The house seems to have 
been satisfied with this explanation and they asked the 
council to concur with them in laying their scheme be- 
fore the king in order to secure his permission to put 
it into operation. The council rejected the scheme, 
giving as their reason the fact that a petition had 
already been sent to His Majesty to continue the present 
currency, which they regarded as sufficient for the needs 
of the province. Nothing more was done in regard 
to the matter during this session, which closed on 
^ June 1.^ 

^ The operation of the sinking fund act had by this 
time begun to prove very burdensome to the debtor 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 215-218, 232, 239-240. 



244 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

class, which for the most part inhabited the country 
parishes. The members of the assembly strove quite 
as hard to prevent its enforcement as they did to secure 
the issue of new bills of credit. Their first successful 
attempt to evade the law was made in 1726. Early in 
January, Fort King George on the Altamaha river was 
destroyed by fire and the independent company sta- 
tioned there was left in an exposed and defenseless 
condition. The assembly was called together by spe- 
cial proclamation to take steps for sheltering and pro- 
visioning the garrison until help could be received from 
Great Britain. These troops were regulars, and it was 
naturally to be expected that the home government 
would take care of them as soon as they could learn 
of their sad plight. The assembly refused to make an 
appropriation even for temporary relief for fear the 
British government would not repay them. There was 
then in the province a considerable sum of money de- 
rived from fines and forfeitures, and they suggested 
that it should be used. Middleton showed that this 
was impossible, since a settlement had not yet been 
made between the crown and the proprietors. The 
next suggestion was that the commanding officer at the 
fort should draw bills on the proper person in Great 
Britain for so much money as would be necessary. 
Middleton disposed of this plan by saying that no one 
in the province would advance money on such bills.^ 
The third device of the assembly was to make use of 
the paper money lying in the treasurer 's hands waiting 
to be burned, as provided in the sinking fund act. The 

1 Com. House Jounials, Ms., VII, 322-325, 325-326, 328-329. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 245 

president agreed to this, on condition that both houses 
should join in a resolution to supply the deficiency in 
the way ordinarily taken for redeeming bills. The 
assembly then offered to appropriate two thousand 
pounds and to provide for replacing the amount, to be 
burned whenever the king repaid the province. The 
president agreed, an ordinance to this effect was hur- 
riedly passed, and the assembly was prorogued on 
February 4 to the third Tuesday in March.^ 

The controversy next took the form of an attempt 
to increase the amount of money in circulation. On 
December 12 the lower house passed on its first read- 
ing, "A Bill for stamping the sum of £86,100 in bills 
of credit and for issuing the same to the inhabitants 
of this Province on good security, ' ' with a saving clause 
suspending its enforcement until the king 's approbation 
could be secured. It was rejected by the council on the 
ground that it would be better to secure His Majesty's 
consent at the outset instead of passing the measure 
with a saving clause. The assembly expressed sur- 
prise that they should reject the bill without giving 
their house an opportunity in conference to explain it. 

The dispute was renewed at the first meeting after 
the holidays, and a message was sent up to the president 
desiring that a joint committee from the two houses 
should consider the establishment of a sufficient cur- 
rency. At the same time they resolved not to proceed 
on any business until an answer to this message was 
received, and notified the president of their action. 
Middleton replied that the council, and not himself had 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 330-335. 



246 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

rejected the bill, and that the assembly should send 
their messages to them. Accordingly, a similar mes- 
sage was sent to the council. 

Their response was that they were always ready to 
appoint conference committees to secure harmony be- 
tween the houses, but that they were forbidden by His 
Majesty's instructions to pass any law altering the 
currency without His Majesty's leave first being ob- 
tained. They went on to say that in their opinion the 
present currency was amply sufficient for the needs of 
the province. The assembly stated in reply that it was 
very unparliamentary for the council to appoint a con- 
ference committee, and yet declare beforehand that they 
would not agree to any compromise. Several messages 
passed on the subject, when it was dropped for a time 
and the tax bill for the year was taken under considera- 
tion. This measure became a law, March 11, 1727, and 
the assembly was prorogued to the second Tuesday in 
October.^ 

The session had barely closed when an agitation was 
begun in the country parishes, which developed into 
something little short of open rebellion.^ Riotous and 
tumultuous meetings were held, an association was 
formed, and a representation setting forth the grievances 
of the people was drawn up to be presented to the presi- 
dent and council. Complaint was made that the people 
were compelled to go down to Charleston for trial be- 

^ Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 394, 400-401, 411-415, 494, 526- 
529; Statutes, III, 273. 

2 The following account is taken mostly from " A Representation of 
the Council of South Carolina to the King's Most Excellent Majesty." 
Public Records, Ms., XIII, 271-335. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 247 

fore base and unjust judges and were made a sacrifice 
to griping lawyers and extortionate oflficials, to whom 
they had to pay three or four times their just due, all 
for want of a law making country produce a legal 
tender or a law providing a sufficient quantity of paper 
bills for the trade of the province. They went on to 
say that base designing men hoarded the bills and that 
merchants kept them for buying foreign produce. The 
farmers were compelled to get money to pay their debts 
and their taxes, and hence were often forced to sell their 
estates for a quarter of their real value. Their troubles 
were further augmented by the gradual reduction of 
the currency through the operation of the law of 1724. 
The address begged for a redress of grievances, and 
closed with a threat that the people would take matters 
into their own hands if the legislature refused to act.' 
Riotous meetings continued to be held, and the presi- 
dent and council issued a proclamation for the mobs 
to disperse. Their leader, Thomas Smith, member 
of the assembly from St. Jameses, Santee, was com- 
mitted to prison by Alexander Skene, a councilor. 
This served only to increase the tumult. Middleton 
reasoned with the mob and agreed to release Smith, 
provided they would disperse and bum their remon- 
strances. They consen.ted to this arrangement, but 
soon repented of it and sent two of their leaders, Wil- 
liam Waities and John Jones, to deliver the representa- 
tion. The council refused to receive it. A few days 
later, two hundred men, led by Smith, Jones, Waities, 
and others, marched to town on horseback and rode up 

^Public Records, Ms., XII, 211-214. 



248 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

to the council chamber fully armed, where two of their 
number presented the representation to President 
Middleton. Then they quietly departed from the town, 
but continued their meetings. Early in July, a gen- 
eral meeting was resolved upon at a place called Dry 
Savannah, about twenty-two miles from Charleston. 
The president issued a warrant against several- of the 
leaders and a proclamation forbidding the meeting.^ 
Landgrave Thomas Smith, father of the Thomas 
Smith who was recently arrested,^ was at this time 
a member of the council, fifth in rank, though he 
had not attended their meetings since the latter part 
of Nicholson's administration. He joined the ranks 
of the discontented and made plans to have himself 
elected president. In June he wrote some letters to 
Captain John Croft of Charleston, in which he 
hinted that the purpose of the meeting at Dry 
Savannah was to collect a body of men to march to 
Charleston and overthrow the government of Mid- 
dleton and his ^'sham councilors." On discovering 
these letters, Middleton had Smith arrested for high 
treason and ordered the militia of the province to meet 
in Charleston. The meeting at Dry Savannah was 
broken up, but the disturbances by no means ceased. 
Advertisements were posted inviting all to join the 
association. The Goose Creek militia company, com- 
manded by Captain William Dry, took the lead in the 

1 Public Records, Ms., XIII, 292-294. 

2 These two men are sometimes confounded with each other. The 
landgrave was an old man, and, as stated, was a member of the council. 
The sen had been a member of the assembly from St. James's Santee 
since April 25, 1726. Ibid., 220; Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 336. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 249 

commotions, and an effort made by the president to 
discharge them from service was treated with contempt. 
They planned to seize the Honorable Alexander Skene 
of the council, by way of reprisal for the imprisonment 
of the two Smiths. Petitions and representations were 
sent to the president and council and many demands 
were made that the assembly should be called to meet 
at once. The merchants and traders of Charleston, 
fearing the effects of a civil war, prevailed upon Mid- 
dleton to call an assembly as the best means of quieting 
the people and inducing them to return to their homes. ^ 
They met on August 1. The following resolutions 
adopted at the beginning of the session showed that 
they were not to be trifled with : 

''Resolved, That it is the undoubted Right of His 
Majesty's Freeborn Subjects within this Province to repre- 
sent their grievances to the Governor, Council, and Assembly 
for the time being jointly or separately and to petition to have 
them redressed. Resolved, That whoever asserts the Con- 
trary is a betrayer of the Rights and Liberties of the people. 
Resolved, That all commitments and prosecutions for such 
petitioning are illegal. Resolved, That by the Election Act 
now in force the Assemblies of this Province ought to sit 
once in six months. Resolved, That tliis present assembly 
was prorogued from the 11th day of March last to the 2nd 
Tuesday in October which is seven months, notwithstanding 
the Election Act aforementioned. Resolved, That this house 
never proposed to the Council any bills that were disad- 
vantageous to the Publick or contrary to His Majesty's Royal 
Orders and Instructions and that all insinuations to the Con- 

1 Public Records, Ms., XIII, 294-301. 



250 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

trary are highly reflecting upon the Honor and Dignity of 
this House. "^ 

The next matter that came up was, "A memorial of 
Landgrave Thomas Smith setting forth his great hard- 
ship in being detained in prison, notwithstanding he 
had petitioned for the benefit of the Habeas Corpus 
Act, and praying relief." This document set forth 
the manner of his arrest and complained that the mili- 
tary power had been called in to assist the civil. Ref- 
erence was here made to the fact that some men from 
Captain Anson's man-of-war had given aid to the town 
constables. Complaint was also made against the chief 
justice for refusing to issue a wiit of habeas corpus. 
The memorial concluded with a prayer that the as- 
sembly would declare him within the benefits of the 
habeas corpus act and that his counsel learned in the 
law might be heard before the bar of the house.^ 

The assembly voted him a hearing at ten o'clock on 
the following morning, and then took up a series of 
petitions from the inhabitants of the parishes of St. 
James's Santee, Christ Church, St, Thomas's and St. 
Dennis's, St. Paul's and St. Bartholomew's, and St. 
John 's. The substance of all was the same, to increase 
the currency, to set a rate on foreign coins different 
from that established by the statute of the 6th of Anne, 
and to pass other laws to screen them from their credit- 
ors.^ The house notified the bearers of the petitions 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 554. The last clause had refer- 
ence to a proclamation issued by the president on June 19. 
2/6id., 557; Public Records, Ms., XIII, 28-30, 303. 
» Public Records, Ms., XIII, 19-27, 31-32. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 251 

that they would consider them at once, and then gave 
them attested copies of the resolutions adopted the 
preceding day in order that they might be scattered 
throughout the province/ 

The council were very angry that a member of their 
board should apply to the lower house for a redress of 
grievances. President Middleton at once sent down 
a message saying that he had heard of Smith's me- 
morial and the action of the house thereon, and that 
"His Majesty's Royal Prerogative" was highly con- 
cerned. He demanded that the house should send him 
at once attested copies of the said memorial and of their 
resolutions concerning the same, and also a copy of their 
resolutions of the previous day." 

The assembly made no haste to reply, and Middleton 
sent another message the same afternoon requiring and 
commanding them to comply with his request immedi- 
ately. They now answered that they would have sent 
up the copies at once, had he desired, instead of de- 
manding, requiring, mid commanding them. However, 
they said that they had ordered their clerk to deliver 
copies to any person he might select to receive them. ^ 

On the next day, August 4, the assembly directed the 
clerk of the crown to produce what papers he had in 
regard to Landgrave Smith's commitment, and ordered 
Chief Justice Richard AUein to attend the house. Mid- 
dleton, hearing of this, sent a message requiring the 
immediate attendance of the house in the council 
chamber. He made them a speech, saying that their 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 558. 

2 Ibid., 561. 
■'Ibid., 562. 



252 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

interference in the Smith case was of much concern 
to His Majesty's prerogative, that high treason was 
a crime that could be considered only in the king's 
courts, and that they must desist from further pro- 
ceedings, as he would '^not suffer His Majesty's Royal 
Prerogative nor his Courts to be trampled upon." 
The assembly retired to their own chamber and voted to 
proceed with the Smith affair. His attorney, Nicholas 
Trott, was admitted to the bar of the house, where he 
proceeded to show that Smith was rightfully entitled 
to a writ of habeas corpus. The doors were thrown 
open, and crowds of people awaited in and around 
the house to hear the result of the examination. The 
president and council, being very much incensed at 
such conduct, voted unanimously that the assembly 
ought to be dissolved at once ; but, because of the pros- 
pect of war with the Indians and Spanish, they decided 
instead to prorogue them to September 2. This was 
done, however, before the assembly could adopt any 
resolutions on the Smith case.^ 

The ravages of the Yemassees on the southern fron- 
tier made it necessary to call them together on August 
23. Indian affairs at once came up for consideration. 
A committee of the assembly reported that three hun- 
dred men should be raised and equipped, and a fort 
built at Beaufort and another among the Creeks. To 
meet these expenses, they proposed their old expedient, 
namely, to issue as a loan the paper bills in the treas- 
urer's hands waiting to be burned, and to appropriate 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 562-565; Public Records, Ms., XIII, 
305-306. 



FINANCIAL HISTOKY 253 

the duties arising from the sinking fund act for war 
purposes. A majority of the council was prevailed 
upon to agree to this, on condition that the money 
should as soon as possible be repaid by way of a tax 
and burned/ 

Having partly provided for the settlement of Indian 
troubles, the house came back to their favorite subject, 
and, on August 30, appointed William Rhett, John 
Lloyd, and George Smith a committee to consider the 
state of the currency.^ Their report, made on the fol- 
lowing day, declared that the amount of currency in 
circulation was entirely inadequate for the needs of the 
province, and suggested as a remedy, ''That a bill be 
brought in to promote and Encourage the Currency of 
Silver and Gold in this Province by affixing the value 
thereof in the present paper currency to a proportion 
as near and equal as may be either to Sterling or Proc- 
lamation money." All gold and silver coins of Eng- 
land, Spain, and other countries were to circulate in 
the province at a fixed valuation. The report went on 
to state that thousands of ounces of gold and silver were 
annually imported to jDurchase rice, and that such a 
law would cause it to remain and increase the volume 
of money in circulation. The report was agreed to, 
and the committee was ordered to bring in a bill. '^ 

The bill was presented, passed the house September 
1, and was sent to the council. The final clause pro- 

^ Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 51\-bl2., 575; Public Records, Ms., 
XIII, 307. 

2 Vom. House Journals, Ms., VII, 584. 
Ubid., 589-591. 



254 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

vided for the enforcement of the act, notwithstanding 
any law to the contrary, thus directly contravening the 
proclamation statute of the 6th of Anne. ^ A message 
from the council reminded the house that they had been 
called to consider Indian affairs, and recommended that 
they finish those matters before attending to other busi- 
ness. The retort of the commons was that they had 
never heard that assemblies were restricted as to what 
they were to do, and that they regarded the currency 
act as of the utmost importance.^ 

The illness of the president and the lack of a quorum 
of the council caused little business to be done from 
the 2d to the 16th of September. On the day last men- 
tioned a message from the council stated that they could 
not agree to the bill, since it was contrary to the statute 
of the 6th of Anne and the instruction to the governor 
to observe the same. Four days later, however, they 
yielded so far as to agree to pass the measure, provided 
it was not made retroactive and contained a clause sus- 
pending its execution until the king's approbation could 
be secured. Otherwise, they declared that they neither 
could nor would pass it.^ This message, like many 
others, was signed jointly by President Middleton and 
second councilor, Ralph Izard. The assembly regarded 
it as very unparliamentary for the president to join 
with the council in saying that he neither could nor 
would pass a bill, ''before ever such a bill hath been 
tendered for his Assent or come properly before him. ' ' 

^ Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 592-593; Puhlic Records, Ms., XIII, 
308. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 598-599. 

^ Ibid., 610, G13. This was known as a saving clause. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 255 

The opening paragraph of their reply will serve to give 
some idea of their indignant frame of mind : 

" 'Tis with the greatest surprise and Concern that we have 
read your message of Yesterday afternoon— sent down with 
the bill for promoting the Currency of Gold and Silver. If 
we must submit to what you would thereby arbitrarily impose 
upon us, Freedom of debate and all our essential and un- 
doubted Privileges are destroyed and taken away, a tyranny 
introduced, as yet (we thank God) unknown to our Constitu- 
tion, and His Majesty's good and Lawful Subjects of this 
Province reduced to the Condition of Vassals and Slaves, a 
consideration on which we cannot reflect without the utmost 
abhorrence and detestation."^ 

Middleton defended himself by citing precedents 
from Nicholson's administration to show that he occa- 
sionally refused his assent to bills before they came 
before him in their final form. For example, in 1724, 
he informed the house that he would not pass a legal 
tender produce bill without a saving clause.^ 

Not discouraged by their failure, the commons at 
once passed on its first reading ''A bill to settle and 
ascertain the value of the paper bills of Credit in this 
Province and to promote the Currency of Gold and 
Silver," which was about the same as the preceding 
bill with a slightly different title. It was promptly 
rejected by the council.^ Then followed the usual 
number of messages filled with references to the royal 
prerogative and to the rights and liberties of the sub- 
ject. 

• Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 614. 

mid., 617. 

3 76id, 617, 624; Public Records, Ms., XIII, 311-312. 



256 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

The session was closed, September 30, with the rati- 
fication of two acts in regard to Indian affairs, one for 
carrying on several expeditions against the Indians and 
the other for appointing an Indian commissioner.^ 
Though many assemblies were called, there was no 
further legislation until the arrival of Governor John- 
son four years later. 

Prorogued from September 30 to the second Thurs- 
day in November, the life of the assembly was closed 
before the latter date by the demise of George I. A 
new assembly was summoned for December 18, but, as 
the writs were not duly published and executed as pro- 
vided by the election act, another was called to meet, 
January 31, 1728.' 

This assembly, the third of the royal period, met on 
the day appointed and elected as their speaker Captain 
William Dry, who, as captain of the Goose Creek 
militia, had taken such a prominent part in the dis- 
turbances of the previous summer.^ 

While the houses of assembly were disputing over 
the currency question, the Indians were murdering and 
pillaging on the frontier. Many settlers left the 
province in sheer despair. On February 17, the lower 
house proposed their old expedient of using the sinking 
fund to meet the expenses of an Indian expedition. 
They doubtless expected that the council would again 

1 statutes. III, 273. Titles only. 

^Public Records, Ms., XIII, 313; Council Journals, Ms., IV, 113. 

'Council Journals, Ms., IV, 117, 119. The original assembly journals 
from 1728 to 1734 have been lost, but copies were recently obtained 
from the British Public Record Office and bound in extra volumes of 
the Public Records. These are cited as Public Records, Extra, Ms. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 257 

be forced to consent, as they had been during the pre- 
vious session. This was not the case, however, for the 
bill was sent down as rejected, together with a long 
message stating the reasons for said rejection and 
criticising the assembly for their attempts to break 
through the sinking fund act. The message went on to 
tell of the exposed condition of the frontiers, and to urge 
that a tax be raised at once to build forts and provision 
the troops. ^ 

Meanwhile the currency bill had not been neglected. 
On February 15, Mr. Rhett, from the committee on the 
state of the currency, made a report. He said that of 
the £120,000 issued in 1723, £13,645 had been called in 
and burned by 1726. Since then £33,645 had been 
paid in to the treasurer to be destroyed. Of this 
amount £20,000 had been appropriated by the previous 
assembly for expeditions against the Indians, and the 
report intimated that the remainder would be disposed 
of in the same way. Accordingly, there were now, or 
soon would be, £106,355 in circulation, which the com- 
mittee regarded as insufficient to caiTy on the trade of 
the province. They proposed that these bills should 
be reprinted on parchment and made a full legal tender, 
and that a law should be passed to enforce and make 
effectual the proclamation statute of the 6th of Anne. 
By this they meant that they would settle a definite 
rate of exchange between proclamation money and cur- 
rency, and all debts were to be payable in either at the 
legal ratio.* In accordance with this report, ''A Bill 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 375, 385, 393-395. 

2 Ibid., 379-381. 

17 



258 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOTAL PEOVINCE 

to Settle and Ascertain the Discount on Paper Bills 
of Credit" was drawn np, passed through the house, 
and sent to the council. The council's reply, made on 
March 1, covers twelve closely written pages of the 
usual ledger size. They went into a histoiy of the 
troubles in regard to the currency and called attention 
to the similarity of this bill to the two rejected in the 
previous sessions. If the act simply confirmed the 
statute of the 6th of Anne it would be useless; if, on 
the other hand, it contradicted that statute, what was 
that "but to pass a Carolina law with a non obstcmte 
to a British Act of Parliament and of purpose for His 
Majesty 's Plantations 1 ' ' They closed with the declara- 
tion that they would never consent to such an act with- 
out a saving clause.* 

Considering this message in connection with a report 
from the council to the king, we are able to discover 
the cause of the distress in the province. By purchas- 
ing negro slaves beyond their ability to pay, the 
planters had become deeply indebted to the merchants 
of Charleston and London. The gradual reduction 
of the currency, as provided for in the sinking fund 
act of 1724, made it more and more difficult to meet 
their obligations. In spite of all their efforts to 
hinder the enforcement of the law, the assembly realized 
that the bills would gradually be redeemed and the 
ratio between currency and proclamation money low- 
ered. So they adopted the expedient of passing an 
act to allow debtors the option of paying their debts 
either in currency or proclamation money at a fixed 

' Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 407-419. 



FINANCIAL IIISTOEY 259 

rate of exchange. This gave an advantage to the 
debtor, whether the ratio went up or down, or, as it was 
expressed in the council 's message, ' ' After a Debtor has 
kept his Creditor as long out of his Debt as he thinks 
fit, he shall discharge it whenever he pleases by paying 
Twenty Pounds Proclamation Money for One Hundred 
Pounds this currency and let the Bills be at what Dis- 
count they will the Trader shall have no more, though 
the bond be to pay Current Bills and the Exchange 
shall fall twenty per cent."^ 

A message from the assembly on March 5 contained 
a long and elaborate argument to prove that the pro- 
posed act was in no way contrary to the statute of the 
6th of Anne, and closed by urging its immediate enact- 
ment without a saving clause.- Along with this mes- 
sage was sent up the currency bill, which had been read 
and passed a second time in the assembly. It was 
promptly rejected by the council. To a request from 
the assembly that they would let them know in what 
manner they would join in settling the currency, the 
council again declared their intention not to pass any 
currency act without a saving clause.^ 

President Middleton reminded the assembly on the 
9th that they had been sitting for five weeks and had 
as yet taken no steps toward providing for the support 
of the government. He recommended that they should 
at once consider the estimates and the annual tax bill. 
Their reply was that the council, by rejecting the cur- 

^ Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 418; Public Records, Ms., 
XIII, 315-316. 

'^Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part T, 423-432. 
^Ibid., 433, 437, 441, 442, 445. 



260 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

rency bill, had taken from them the means of raising 
the necessary supplies. In conclusion, they said, ''We 
humbly propose that a Loan be made of the money De- 
signed for the Creek Expedition to furnish our im- 
mediate necessities, since it is agreed that it is not easy 
to prosecute that undertaking." This money had been 
appropriated out of the sinking fund. The idea of 
the assembly was to delay the tax bill until the executive 
was compelled to use it for current expenses. Middle- 
ton declared that he could see no connection between 
the currency act and a tax bill, and, as for their j)roposi- 
tion in regard to a loan of the money voted for the 
Creek expedition, it was too preposterous to be con- 
sidered. Not to be thwarted in their efforts to get the 
currency into circulation, the assembly now demanded 
that the expedition against the Creeks should be under- 
taken at once. The president called attention to their 
recent statement that there was no further occasion 
for it, and declared that he would not begin war with 
the Indians if it could be avoided.^ 

The subsequent conduct of the assembly is well de- 
scribed in the following account taken from the report 
of the council to the crown, already referred to : 

"At length they made a show as if they intended to raise 
a Tax, and on the 23d of March sent up a Tax Bill once read, 
which was read and sent down to them the 4th of April fol- 
lowing. But instead of giving it a second reading, they sat 
from the Fourth of April until the Tenth in order to weary 
out your Majesty's Council (after they had sat about nine 
weeks already) in appointing Committees and Reading of 

^Public Records, Extra, Ms., I. Part I, 449-450, 453^54, 469-470. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 261 

Bills about Turnpikes, Weights and Measures, Highways, 
Grievances, Revising Journals, and every Trifle they could 
think of, and then on the 12th of April they sent up to your 
Majesty's Council another Currency Bill entitled, 'A Bill to 
promote and encourage the Importation of Gold,' of the same 
stamp vv'ith their Silver Bill, to force creditors to take it at 
the price set upon it by their Act and the prices made per- 
petual."^ 

The assembly adjourned from April 13 to April 30. 
After a quorum was secured their first business was 
to send up a message inquiring about the currency bill. 
The council in turn asked about the tax bill, which 
was lying before the assembly. Some time was spent 
in dispute, one house insisting upon a consideration 
of the currency act and the other of the tax act. On 
the refusal of the lower house to consent to a saving 
clause, the currency bill was again defeated.- 

The assembly now turned their attention again to the 
case of Landgrave Smith. Smith sent in another me- 
morial recapitulating his former complaints against 
Chief Justice Allein for refusing to grant the writ of 
habeas corpus, and further complaining that he kept 
him under £10,000 bail for nearly a year and would 
neither bring him to trial nor discharge him. The me- 
morial was referred to a committee, which reported 
that these proceedings were arbitrary, illegal, and un- 
precedented, and recommended the assembly to con- 
sider the matter until justice was secured. The report 
was taken under consideration, and the assembly re- 

^ Public Records, Ms., XIII, 320-321. 

2 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 496, 500-501, 509-510. 



262 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

solved that Judge Allein should be served with a copy 
of the said report and ordered to attend at the bar of 
the house at ten o'clock the following morning with a 
written answer to Smith's complaint.' Allein refused 
to appear, and sent a letter stating that he could not do 
so without derogating from the power and authority 
entrusted to him by the royal commission. ■ The as- 
sembly at once resolved that this answer was an affront 
to the honor of their house and a high contempt of its 
dignity, and ordered that the judge should be taken 
into the custody of their messenger. The messenger 
hastened to execute the order and found Allein in the 
council chamber. He was proceeding to take the chief 
justice in charge, when he was seized by President Mid- 
dleton and turned out of the room without much cere- 
mony. On receiving news of this, the assembly re- 
solved that the conduct of the president was arbitrary, 
unprecedented, an infringement on the liberties and 
privileges of the house, and a high affront to their 
honor. A message in accordance with this resolution 
was sent up to the president."' Middleton now decided 
to appeal to the people, the assembly was dissolved, 
and a new election was ordered.* The appeal was in 
vain. Nearly all of the old members were returned, 
and Captain Dry was again chosen speaker. When 
Dry was presented to the president for his approbation, 
he demanded a conservation of the rights and privileges 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 519-520. 
■Uhid., 522-523; Puhlic Records, Ms., XIII, 327. 
'Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part I, 521-523. 
* Cou)icil Journals. Ms., IV, 203-204. This assembly met July 9. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 263 

of the assembly instead of desiring it/ Middleton re- 
plied that he did not intend to invade their privileges and 
desired that they would not invade his, and then went 
on to urge them to lay aside all animosities and provide 
for the support of the government. The assembly 
professed a willingness to do this, but, instead of pro- 
ceeding on the tax bill, appointed a committee on the 
currency and requested the council to appoint a similar 
committee for a conference. This they refused to do.^ 

All of a sudden the house began to manifest unusual 
zeal in considering Indian affairs. On the 17th, a mes- 
sage was sent up asking for a conference committee to 
consider the framing of an Indian trade act. The 
council replied very curtly that the principal business 
was to raise money for the support of the government 
and that that matter must be dispatched before any 
other affair whatsoever.^ 

In answer to this, there was sent up the next day a 
new currency bill entitled, "A Bill to Establish a suffi- 
cient Fund of Gold and Silver and also to call in and 
sink the Paper Currency of this Province." It was 
rejected by the council on its first reading. On receiv- 
ing a message to that effect, the assembly desired leave 
to adjourn until September, saying that, on account of 
the excessive heat and the illness of members, they could 
not keep together a quorum for business. Middleton 
refused the request and said that a tax bill must first 
be passed. The assembly then adjourned to the follow- 

1 Council Journals, Ms., IV, 205-206; Public Records, Ms., XIII, 330. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., IV, 206-207, 209. 

3 Ibid., 211. 



264 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A KOYAL PKOVINCE 

ing Monday, July 22, when only the speaker and two 
members appeared. They continued to meet until the 
25th and then absented themselves also. The council 
resolved that such conduct was '*a high Indignity and 
Contempt offered to His Majesty's Royal authority, 
greatly prejudicial to the Interest of this His Province, 
and contrary to His Majesty's Royal Instructions." 
A proclamation was issued on the 27th dissolving the 
house.^ 

Writs were issued for a new assembly to meet Sep- 
tember 17. On the appointed day only a few members 
were present, and Middleton prorogued them from time 
to time until the 20th of November. The council then 
met, and, after waiting for three days, decided that the 
members of the lower house were purposely absenting 
themselves, and advised the president to dissolve their 
body. This was accordingly done on the 23d of No- 
vember.^ 

Another assembly was now summoned to meet Jan- 
uary 15, 1729. On account of the extremely cold 
weather, a quorum was not secured until the 17th. The 
same members were returned and the same speaker was 
chosen. He again demanded a conservation of the 
rights and privileges of the assembly.^ President 
Middleton urged the necessity of the inunediate pass- 
age of a tax bill, stating that the salaries of all officers 
of the government were in arrears from one and a half 
to two years. *'A Bill to encourage the importation 

•^Council Journals, Ms., TV, 213, 215-216, 219, 221-222. 

2 Ibid., 224-230. 

3 Ibid., 231-234; Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 559-561, 566. 



FINANCIAL HISTOKY 265 

of Silver and Gold by making both current in all pay- 
ments" passed the assembly on the 25th. It was the 
same as the previous currency bills, being the seventh 
of its kind. The council again rejected it and declared 
that they would enter upon no business whatever until 
supplies for the support of the government were 
granted. To this the assembly replied that they would 
not pass a tax bill until some way could be found for 
settling the currency, and they asked for a conference 
committee on the subject. The council ignored the 
request and adhered to their resolution not to proceed on 
any other business until the tax bill was passed.^ 

A committee was appointed, on Februaiy 1, to con- 
sider the general state of the province. They reported 
on the 4th, that they found the province " in a very dis- 
tressed and calamitous condition occasioned by the 
great losses which the Inhabitants in general have sus- 
tained by the late dreadful hurricane and storms, by 
the great mortality among them and their slaves, by 
the large and growing Debts of the Province, the 
scarcity of money, and the decay of public credit, all 
which unless timely prevented by the care of the Legis- 
lature must produce fatal consequences to the Prov- 
ince. ' ' The report went on to suggest that a bill should 
be passed fixing the rate between coin and currency, 
and that the current expenses of the government should 
be defrayed out of the funds in the treasurer's hands 
waiting to be burned. The report was adopted and 
there was passed on its first reading ^'A Bill to make 
Gold a tender in all payments and to make Silver Cur- 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I,, Part II, 561-563, 572, 580-583. 



266 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

rent in all payments to and from the Publick." The 
council in reply said that, as it was very unparliamen- 
tary for the assembly to send up two bills of the same 
nature during one session, they did not think fit to give 
it a reading. In concluding, they reaffirmed their de- 
termination not to enter upon any business until sup- 
plies for the support of the government were granted, ' 
Numerous other messages passed on the subject, and 
the bitterness between the houses increased. 

The dissolution of the assembly was brought about 
in this way. A certain Henry Hargrave was deputy 
secretaiy of the province, as well as clerk of the coun- 
cil. He was ordered to appear before the bar of the 
lower house and answer certain questions in his capacity 
as deputy secretary. The council refused to allow him 
to attend. Being sent down shortly afterwards with 
a message, he was detained by the assembly and asked 
his reasons for not obeying their order. He pleaded 
in defense the council's refusal to grant permission. 
The speaker then asked him if Governor Nicholson's 
instructions were not recorded in the secretary's office, 
and he refused to answer. John Brown, messenger of 
the assembly, was now ordered to take Hargrave into 
custody. Middleton and the council refused to receive 
any messages or transact business until he was re- 
leased. The lower house resolved that the refusal of 
the president to receive their messages and addresses 
was unparliamentary and an infringement on their 
privileges.^ A proclamation was issued, on February 
21, to dissolve the assembly.^ 

1 Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 586-593. 

2 Ibid., 597-598, 601-602. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., IV, 257. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 267 

Another assembly, the seventh of the royal period, 
was called to meet on August 6. The old leaders, 
William Dry, John Lloyd, Paul Jenys, William Waities, 
Benjamin Whitaker, and Thomas Smith were all re- 
turned. Conspicuous among the new members was 
Chief Justice Allein, the old antagonist of Landgrave 
Smith. As in the previous summer, most of the mem- 
bers refused to appear, and the assembly was prorogued 
from time to time until October 17, and was then dis- 
solved. There was never a quorum present, except on 
October 15, when twenty-two members appeared before 
the council and took the state oaths. In order to pre- 
vent the organization of the assembly, all but nine of 
these refused to take the qualification oath in their own 
house and hence no business could be done. Exasper- 
ated by such conduct. President Middleton issued an- 
other proclamation of dissolution on the 17th. ^ 

Writs were again issued for a new assembly to meet 
on December 2, but before that date they were pro- 
rogued to January 13, 1730. Most of the old members 
were re-elected, though for some reason Captain Dry's 
name was not among those returned from Goose Creek. 
Mr. John Lloyd of St. Thomas's and St. Dennis's was 
chosen speaker. In his speech to the president, he 
merely claimed, instead of demanding, the usual rights 
and privileges of the house.^ The history of this as- 
sembly was very similar to that of its immediate pre- 
decessors. Its existence was terminated by dissolution 
on April 29, and there is no evidence to show that an 

1 Council Journals, Ms., TV, 257-266. 

2 Ibid., 266-269. 



268 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

assembly ever met again until after the arrival of Gov- 
ernor Johnson in December, 1730.' 

During this long controversy in the province, the 
affairs of South Carolina were not being neglected in 
England. Reference has already been made in the 
section on the land system to the parliamentary statute 
of 1729 providing for the surrender of the proprietary 
charter and the assumption by the crown of seven- 
eighths of the property rights of the proprietors. 
South Carolina, which had been under a provisional 
government since 1721, now became in the fullest sense 
a royal province, and the king became its territorial lord 
as well as its governmental head. 

The first business of the crown was to appoint a gov- 
ernor and give him definite instructions to settle the 
disturbances in the province. As early apparently as 
1726, Robert Johnson, the last of the proprietary gov- 
ernors, was in England using all his efforts to displace 
Nicholson and to secure for himself a royal commis- 
sion.^ He was finally successful, for the king gave 
notice of his appointment, November 22, 1729, and 
ordered the Board of Trade to draw up his commission 
and instructions.^ The commission was signed, Jan- 
uary 1, 1730,* though the instructions were not com- 
pleted until the following June. The reason for this 
delay is to be found partly in the red-tape, character- 
istic of the English governmental system of that day, 
but principally in the difficult character of the problems 

1 Council Journals, Ms., IV, 276-279, 280. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XII, 183-185. 
»Ibid., XIII, 245. 

* Council Journals, Ms., V, 1-7. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 269 

that had to be solved. There were two leading ques- 
tions at issue, the settlement of the quit rents and the 
settlement of the finances. The first has already been 
considered in connection with the land system. The 
governor was allowed to consent to the passage of an 
act remitting the arrears of rent, provided it required 
future payments to be made in proclamation money, 
required a registration of titles, and repealed the land 
law of 1696. 

The other problem, that in regard to the finances, 
was more difficult of solution. As we have already 
seen, the province was reduced almost to a state of 
anarchy while the legislative houses were quarreling 
over the currency. Most of the provincial laws, being 
temporary in character, had expired ; officials could not 
be paid, as no tax bills were passed ; trade, agriculture, 
and all forms of business began to suffer. Neither the 
council nor the assembly would make the slightest con- 
cession, and it became evident that the home govern- 
ment would have to settle the matter. The lower house 
sent petitions and memorials to England begging for 
a suspension of the sinking fund act and for a further 
increase of the currency. A long representation of the 
council to His Majesty gave their side of the con- 
troversy.^ They also had a special agent in London, 
Mr. Stephen Godin, who was a zealous advocate of 
their views.^ Trade became so much affected by the 
unsettled condition of the province that the merchants 

1 Puhlic Records, Ms., XIII, 271-335. The account just given is 
taken largely from this representation and from the journals, 
s Ibid., 350-372. 



270 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of London trading to South Carolina finally decided to 
take a hand in the matter. On February 4, 1730, they 
petitioned the Board of Trade to instruct the newly ap- 
pointed governor to assent to an act for emitting £100,- 
000 in currency to retire the outstanding bills, and to 
allow a suspension of the sinking fund law for seven 
years and the use of the funds for the support of poor 
Protestant settlers. This was signed by twenty-one 
merchants.^ 

The following month, a paper, entitled "State of the 
Paper Currency in South Carolina and a proposal in 
relation to the same," was laid before the Board of 
Trade by Governor Johnson. He said that a paper 
currency was absolutely necessary, and that the only 
question was in regard to the amount. He suggested 
the issue of £106,000 to replace the old bills, thus favor- 
ing the views of the merchants rather than those of the 
planters, who thought that £140,000 at least were neces- 
sary.^ 

After considering carefully these various plans and 
arguments, the Board finally drew up Johnson's in- 
structions in accordance with the proposition of the 
merchants. He was to consent to a suspension of the 
sinking fund act for seven years, and allow the funds 
to be used in laying out townships and purchasing sup- 
plies for poor Protestant settlers. Another article 
empowered him to consent to an act for establishing a 
new paper currency upon such a footing as would best 
answer the needs of the province, provided that the 
said act contained a saving clause.^ 

J Public Records, Ms., XIV, 32-33. 
2 Ibid., 61-68. 
Ubid., 157-159. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 271 

The instructions contained one hundred and twenty- 
four articles altogether. With some slight changes due 
to circumstances, they were the same usually given to 
colonial governors. The members of the council were 
named in the first article. They were Thomas Brough- 
ton, Johnson's brother-in-law, who was later commis- 
sioned lieutenant-governor, Arthur Middleton, Ralph 
Izard, William Bull, Alexander Skene, Francis Yonge, 
James Kinlock, Robert Wright, John Fenwicke, Joseph 
Wragg, Thomas Waring, and John Hammerton.^ 

Johnson arrived in the province about the middle of 
December, 1730. On the 16th the council met, and his 
commission was ordered to be read publicly. Accord- 
ingly, the governor, council, and a large concourse of 
people repaired to Granville's bastion, where the com- 
mission was read and the cannons fired a salute. Going 
back to the council chamber, the governor and council- 
ors took the oaths of office and proceeded to business. 
A proclamation was issued continuing all officers, civil 
and military, in their respective posts until further 
orders.^ 

Johnson's first assembly met January 20, 1731. 
Many of the old members were returned, and John 
Lloyd was again chosen speaker.^ Governor Johnson, 
in his opening speech, told of the purchase of the prov- 
ince by the crown and predicted a bright future. He 
urged the members to forget all animosities and to 
provide for the public debts, now four years in arrears.^ 

Public Records, Ms., XIV, 147-214, 147-148. 
2 Council Journals, Ms., V, 9. 
^Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 605. 
*Ibid., 605-608. 



272 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Both houses followed this advice. The quit rent act 
has already been considered, so far as it affected the 
land system. In addition, however, it suspended the 
sinking fund law of 1724 for seven years, and provided 
that the funds already in the treasury by virtue of that 
law should be appropriated toward paying the public 
debt, that £5,000 per annum for the next seven years 
should be used for aiding poor Protestant settlers, and 
the remainder for paying the residue of the public 
debt' 

Another law was necessary to put this plan into op- 
eration. The last appropriation bill, passed in March, 
1727, provided for the expenses of the government up 
to September of that year. No taxes having been 
raised since then, the goverament was deeply in debt. 
As it was impossible to raise by direct tax more than 
enough for the current year, the following expedient 
was adopted. The debts, which had accrued from Sep- 
tember, 1727, to March, 1731, amounted to £104,775 :1 rS^. 
A law was enacted authorizing the issue of public 
orders to this amount, bearing interest at five per cent, 
until paid off. These were to be redeemed in seven 
years, as follows: The £40,000 in the treasury waiting 
to be burned in accordance with the sinking fund act 
were appropriated to this purpose. The amount com- 
ing into the treasury by virtue of the said act was com- 
puted at £13,500 annually, of which £8,500 came from 
the duty on negroes and £5,000 from the duties on 
liquors and merchandise. The negro duties for seven 
3^ears, amounting to £59,500, were to be used for re- 
deeming orders, the duties on liquor and merchandise, 

1 statutes, III, 289-304. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 273 

for subsisting poor Protestant settlers. It was esti- 
mated that the entire issue would be redeemed within 
seven years. ^ How this could be done without an in- 
crease in the negro duties, is not clear. As a matter 
of fact they were not all redeemed until 1750.^ 

The passage of this measure was delayed by a dis- 
pute over the allowance to President Middleton for his 
services as acting governor. He was summoned be- 
fore a committee of the assembly, and asked if he had 
ever during his administration sent any memorial or 
representation to Great Britain relating to the public 
affairs of the province. He replied that he had not, 
and that he had never complained to the home govern- 
ment against any set of inhabitants in general or 
against any persons in particular. In spite of this 
humble explanation, he received little more than half 
the amount really due him.^ His case was a warning 
to public officials not to oppose the popular will. The 
efforts of Governor Johnson to have a permanent salary 
settled upon the governor, and the struggle of Chief 
Justice Wright to secure his allowance have been dis- 
cussed in other connections.^ 

So far the planters had gained one point: they had 
secured the suspension of the sinking fund act. They 
failed, however, to obtain an increased issue of paper 
money. Only £13,500 had been canceled under the 
sinking fund act of 1724. Deducting this from the 
£120,000 issued in 1723, there remained £106,500 in 

i statutes, III, 334-341. 
2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXV, 140. 
'> Public Records, Extra, Ms., I, Part II, 699, 711, 791-792. 
*See Land System, Chapter II, Land Frauds; Government, Chapter 
I, The Executive. 
18 



274 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

circulation.^ A statute of August 20, 1731, provided 
for tlie issue of this amount in new bills to replace the 
old. If any surplus remained, it was to be turned over 
to the treasurer and used for public purposes. The 
law was without any saving clause and made no pro- 
vision for the redemption and destruction of the bills. ^ 
This sum of £106,500, reprinted in 1748 when the bills 
had become torn and defaced,^ remained until the Revo- 
lution as the only paper money that was full legal 
tender in all payments. Another act to authorize the 
reprint of the issue was passed August 23, 1769, but 
was disallowed by the home government. In 1771 
there was only £98,895 in circulation, the remainder 
having been lost or destroyed.* The rate of exchange 
became fixed by 1731 at seven to one, and it so remained 
until the fall of the royal government. £100 sterling 
was equivalent to £700 currency, or £133 J proclama- 
tion money. 

Other attempts were made to increase the amount of 
legal tender currency, but they all failed. Thus in 
May, 1736, and again in June, 1746, acts were passed 
for stamping and issuing £210,000 in bills of credit, 
based upon the same principle as the bank act of 1712. 
Both contained saving clauses, but the most determined 
efforts failed to secure the approval of the home govern- 
ment.^ 

^statutes, IX, 778. 

2 Ibid., Ill, 305-307. 

»Ibid., 702-704. 

*Ibid., IV, 312-314; Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 351, 357; Com. 
House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 490, 566-567. 

^Statutes, III, 423-430, 671-677; Public Records, Ms., XIX, 15-16, 
214-216, XX, 124-126, XXII, 265-267, XXIII, 5-6, 56-61, 270-275, 
281-282, XXVI, 30-31 ; Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 425-428. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 275 

Parliament passed a statute in 1751 prohibiting the 
New England colonies from issuing any more bills of 
credit, except for current expenses, when they must 
be redeemed within two years, or for war purposes, 
when they must be redeemed within five years. These 
were not to be a legal tender for private debts, although 
the bills already in existence might continue to be so. 
For assenting to currency acts which were contrary to 
the provisions of this statute, colonial governors were 
liable to dismissal from office.^ Practically the same 
restrictions were placed on the other colonies by in- 
structions to their governors, but the statute was not 
extended to them until 176-1-,- 

The colonies took advantage of this power to issue 
limited legal tender bills redeemable in a specified 
time. Indeed several issues had been made in South 
Carolina before the passage of the parliamentary 
statutes. They were known there as public orders, and 
were made receivable by the treasurer in payment of 
all taxes and duties. 

When the fourth intercolonial war began in 1754, 
South Carolina, along with the other colonies, was 
asked to make some provision for the general defense 
of America. The assembly resolved to issue £40,000 in 
public orders, redeemable in seven years. Governor 
Glen informed them that his instructions forbade his 
assenting to any act for issuing paper currency except 
with a saving clause; but as the case was urgent and 
would not admit of delay, he was willing to approve 

' Statutes at Large, 24 George II, chap. 53. 
^ Ibid., 4 George III., chap. 34. 



276 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 



the measure under one condition. The condition was 
that the issue should be made in accordance with the 
act of parliament of 1751, that is the hills must not be 
made legal tender in the payment of private debts and 
ample provision must be made for redemption within 
five years. This statute, to be sure, did not extend 
to the southern provinces, but he was of opinion that 
it expressed the general policy of the home government. 
The assembly became very angry and threatened to 
make complaints in England against Glen. They 
finally gave way, however, and passed the bill in the 
form demanded. £33,600 were issued, redeemable in 
five years.^ 

The following table will show the amounts issued 
at various times and the provisions made for sinking 
them. The dates in the last column represent the time 
limits within which the respective issues were by law 
to be called in and redeemed. With the exception of 
the last two issues, all were redeemed with commend- 
able promptness: 



Date of Issue. 
1731, Aug. 20, 
1737, March 5, 
1740, April 5, 
1740, Sept. 19, 
1742, July 10, 
1745, May 25, 
1755, May 20, 
1757, July 6, 



Amount. 
£104,775:1:33/4, 
35,010, 
25,000, 
11,508, 
63,000, 
20,000, 
33,600, 
229,300, 



Sinking Fund. 
Duty on negroes, 
Annual tax. 



Fortification fund. 
Annual tax, 



1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXX, 102, 118-119, 478, 507-512 
Records, Ms., XXVI, 184-202; Statutes, IV, 18-19. 

2 Most of this issue was redeemed by 1738, as provided 
Then there seems to have been a delay for a few years and 
mainder canceled between 1745 and 1750. 



Sunk by 
1738^ 
1742 
1745 
1745 
1752 
1750 
1760 
1762 

; Public 

by law. 
the re- 



FINANCIAL HISTOKY 277 

Date of Issue. Amount. Sinking FunJ. Sunk by 

1760, July 31, 316,693:2:5, Annual tax, 1765 

1760, Aug. 20, 125,000, " " 1705 

1767, April 18, 60,000, Add. duties on rum, etc., 1772 

1770, April 7, 70,000, Gen. duty fund, 1775* 

The greater part of these bills were issued either for 
actual war purposes of for strengthening the defenses 
of the province. For example, the issue of 1737 was 
to defend South Carolina and Georgia against a pos- 
sible attack by the Spanish and Indians, the two of 
1740 to aid General Oglethorpe's expedition against 
St. Augustine, that of 1742 to defend Georgia against 
the Spaniards, and those from 1755 to 1760 to carry 
on the French and Indian war. The £20,000 issued 
in 1745 for repairing the defenses of the town antici- 
pated the regular fortification fund. The issue of 1731 
has already been discussed. It was to pay the public 
debts for the preceding four years. The £60,000 
printed in 1767 were used to build an exchange and 
custom house and a new watch house in Charleston, 
the £70,000 in 1770 to build the court houses and gaols 
made necessary by the circuit court act of 1769. 

In addition to the bills of credit and public orders, 
there was a third form of paper currency which served 
as a medium of exchange, the so-called tax certificates. 
After the annual revenue bill was passed it would often 

^statutes, III, 334-341, 461-464, 546-553, 577-579, 595-597, 653- 
656, IV, 18-19, 45, 113-128, 144-148, 257-261, 323-326. Much valuable 
information is to be derived from connnittee reports of 1749, 1764, 1774 
and 1775. Com. House Journals, Ms., XXV, 138-143, XXXVI, 216-219, 
XXXIX, 108, 244. In 1774 there was still outstanding £51,345 of the 
1767 issue and £59,760 of the 1770 issue. Earlier issues had been can- 
celed except for a few orders, which were probably lost. 



278 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

require several months to assess and collect the taxes. 
During the latter part of the colonial period, the tax 
bills regularly provided for the issue of certificates of 
indebtedness to the various public creditors. These 
were received at the treasury in payment of taxes. 

This custom was utilized by the assembly in 1774 
to outwit Lieutenant-Governor Bull and the council. A 
tax bill had not been passed in several years. The 
assembly ordered all public accounts to be audited, and 
then, without legal sanction, issued certificates to the 
public creditors, to be provided for in the next tax bill. 
The certificates were signed by the clerk and five mem- 
bers of the assembly. Several patriotic merchants 
and planters agreed to accept them in payment of 
debts, and they circulated side by side with the full legal 
tenders. Even the crown officials received them on 
their salaries.^ 

In concluding this section on the monetary system 
a brief summary may be of sei'vice. The English 
pound sterling was the standard of value, though very 
little English money was ever in circulation. Trade 
with the West Indies and South America brought in 
a great many Spanish, French, and Portuguese coins. 
There was a tendency in all the colonies to rate them 
high in order to get more than their neighbors did. 
The result was a proclamation, issued by Queen Anne 
in 1704 and enacted into a parliamentary statute in 
1707, establishing the maximum value which could be 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 162-164; Public 
Records, Ms., XXXIV, 36—40. This subject is discussed more in detail 
in tlie final chapter. See pp. 393-3D4. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 279 

placed upon foreign coins. This fixed the ratio of 
proclamation money to sterling at four to three, or, to 
put it in another form, £100 sterling was equivalent to 
£133^ proclamation money. 

The internal business of the colony was carried on 
with paper currency. Full legal tender bills of credit 
were first issued in 1703. Subsequent emissions in- 
creased the amount to £106,500 by 1731, and it remained 
at that figure until the Revolution. After 1731, the 
ratio to sterling was seven to one. Numerous issues 
of limited legal tender public orders were made between 
1731 and 1770. Inasmuch as they were received in 
payment of taxes and were regularly redeemed in the 
time provided by law, they circulated at par with the 
bills of credit. Another form of paper money was the 
tax certificates issued to anticipate the collection of the 
annual tax. Similar to these were the certificates is- 
sued in 1774 on the sole authority of the commons house 
of assembly. 

The struggle over the paper money question strength- 
ened the antagonism between the creditor and debtor 
classes. It made the merchants of Charleston the 
natural allies of the crown. His Majesty lost their 
support, partly because he failed to reward them with 
positions of trust and responsibility in the province, and 
partly because he protected them so well from the cheap 
money schemes of the planters that they became ob- 
livious of danger. 

B. Revenue System 
The revenues of the province were derived from 
taxation, direct and indirect, fees, fines, licenses, and 
quit rents. 



280 SOUTH CAROLrNA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Direct taxes were levied on land and negroes by 
an annual tax law. Until 1732, the law was passed 
during the year for which provision was being made, 
but, after that date, not until the year had closed. 
The method of procedure in framing a tax bill was 
about as follows: At their meeting in the fall, the 
commons house of assembly appointed a committee 
to examine petitions and accounts, a committee on the 
estimate of the public debts, a committee to examine 
the treasurer's accounts, and a committee to bring 
in a tax bill. The last mentioned committee pre- 
sented a bill, which at once passed its first reading, 
with blanks left to insert the amount, and was sent 
up to the council. An advertisement was inserted in 
the Gazette, notifying all who had claims against the 
public that they must deliver their accounts, properly 
attested, to the clerk of the house before a certain date, 
usually January 1. As the accounts came in, they were 
read before the house and referred to the committee on 
petitions and accounts. After a period varying from 
a few weeks to several months, this committee presented 
a report consisting of a list of all the accounts submitted 
to them, numbered in regular order, and also their 
opinion on each separate case. The whole house then 
considered the report paragraph by paragraph. Most 
of the items would be accepted, some rejected, some 
recommitted, and occasionally an allowance would be 
made which the committee had refused. Other accounts 
would come in later, and the committee often made a 
second and even a third report. Some special accounts 
were allowed by the house without going to the com- 
mittee at all. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 281 

The committee on the estimate of the public debts 
next rei^orted a tabulated schedule of the expenses of 
the government for the year, including the accounts 
already approved by the house, as well as provision for 
the public officials, scout boats, rangers, forts, and other 
charges. 

A report from the committee to examine the treas- 
urer's accounts would now be received, setting forth 
the amount of money in the treasurer's hands arising 
from the surplus of the previous year's tax, from the 
general duty act, and from the duty on negroes. This 
would be applied toward defraying the annual charges, 
and the tax to be raised was decreased to that extent. 
The amount of the levy having thus been determined 
upon, a committee would be appointed to apportion it 
between Charleston and the country. 

The house was now ready to pass the tax bill through 
its second reading, the blanks being filled with the sum 
mentioned in the schedule of charges, less the amount 
already in the hands of the treasurer. The council 
passed it on its second reading and sent it back to the 
house, together with a separate schedule of amend- 
ments,^ which were almost uniformly rejected. The 
bill next passed both houses on its third reading and 
was sent back to the assembly to be engrossed. Finally, 
the members of the assembly went to the council cham- 
ber in a body to see the governor sign it. By this act, 
the bill became a law. Certificates, receivable in pay- 

1 This method of suggesting amendment, as we have seen, was adopted 
December 11, 1739. 



282 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

ment of taxes, would now be issued to all the public 
creditors/ 

Coming to the bill itself, let us consider briefly that 
of December 18, 1739, which may be regarded as typical. 
£35,833 :6:11£- currency was to be raised, one-sixth by 
the inhabitants of Charleston and five-sixths by the 
country people. A tax of ten shillings per head was 
levied on all negroes and other slaves within the prov- 
ince, and of ten shillings per hundred acres on all land, 
except that appropriated to churches and free schools, 
town lots outside Charleston plat, and the lands of new 
settlers in the frontier townships and on the Welsh 
tract upon the Pedee river. Owners of land and of 
slaves outside of Charleston were required to render a 
particular account thereof in writing to the inquirers 
and collectors of their respective parishes or tax dis- 
tricts, on or before the second Tuesday of the following 
February, and to pay their taxes not later than ten 
days after the second Tuesday in March. From one 
to three inquirers and collectors were appointed for 
each parish or tax district, except St. Philip's Charles- 
ton, which had three inquirers and five assessors and 
collectors.^ The Charleston inquirers were ordered to 
take an account of the real estate and slaves belonging 
to the inhabitants of the town, whether the same were 
within or without the limits of the parish. All with- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XVII, passim. The account just given 
is based upon the procedure followed in framing the tax bill of 1741-42. 
The fiscal year began March 25. 

2 In early times there was a double set of these officials for the 
country also, but after the tax began to be rated solely on land and 
slaves there was little need for inquirers. 



FINANCIxiL HISTORY 283 

out the limits were assessed in the country tax; all 
within, in the town tax. On the last Tuesday in Feb- 
ruary the assessors met at the new court house, received 
the report of the inquirers, and assessed the Charleston 
quota on the "real and personal estates, stocks and 
abilities ' ' of the people. The persons so assessed were 
required to pay their taxes to the assessors and collect- 
ors on or before the third Tuesday in April. 

In addition to their share of the general tax, the 
people of Charleston were further required to raise 
£1,827:8:8 currency for building a workhouse and 
maintaining the town watcli.^ Masters of vessels and 
transient traders contributed to the tax according to the 
amount of goods which they imported into Charleston.^ 

This act is a fair sample of all those passed during 
the royal period. Others differ in slight details. By 
the acts of May 29, 1736, and March 5, 1737, a poll tax 
of seventeen shillings six pence currency was levied on 
all white males between the ages of twenty-one and 
sixty, except settlers in the new townships.^ The ex- 
traordinary expenses of the French and Indian War 
caused a wide extension of the domain of taxation. 
The act of May 19, 1758, not only increased the rate 
on land and slaves, but it also imposed a poll tax on 
free negroes and introduced the income tax feature. A 
tax was levied on annuities, money out at interest, the 
profits of country storekeepers, and the incomes of 
physicians and surgeons.^ In 1760 this was extended 

1 A rude, imperfect system of police. 

2 Statutes, III, 527-541. 
3/6id., 438-439, 473. 
*Ibid., IV, 54. 



284 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

to all trades and professions except that of the clergy, 
and a tax was also imposed upon the value of lots, 
wharves, and buildings in towns, villages, and bor- 
oughs.' Though the rate was reduced after the war, 
these taxes were kept up until the passage of the last 
tax bill in 1769. 

The amount raised per annum by direct taxation^ 
varied from a few hundred pounds to more than 
£284,000, according to the size of the province and 
whether it was at peace or war. The regular expenses 
of the government were small during the proprietary 
period and were usually provided for by quit rents, 
customs duties, liquor licenses, and fees, direct taxation 
being rarely resorted to except in emergencies. Taking 
a number of years at random, we find the amount of 
taxes levied to be as follows: 

1682 £ 400 

1685 500 

1701 550 

1724 11,672 

1733 40,160 : 12 :6 

1743 51,195:11:6 

1753 43,102:2:63/4 

1758 166,438:14:71/4 

1761 284,757:17:434 

1769 70,326:7:2 3 

1 Statutes, III, 129. 

2 This term is here used in its economic sense to denote a tax which 
cannot ordinarily be shifted. I have never found it in any of the 
journals, records, or statutes of the time. The chief sources of taxation, 
however, were land and slaves, and it is very probable that the South 
Carolinians in the convention of 1787 thought only of these when the 
term direct tax was used. 

3 Ibid., II, V, 182, III, 206, 352, 597, IV, 6, 53, 155, 315, 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 285 

Of indirect taxes the most important were the import 
and export duties. A small export duty on deer, 
beaver, otter, fox, boar, and raccoon skins was imposed 
by an act of September 26, 1691.' As early as 1695, 
there was an import duty on liquors, tobacco, and pro- 
visions.^ The earliest general duty law preserved, 
that of May 6, 1703, provided an extensive tariif sched- 
ule. Thus specific import duties were imposed on 
wine, beer, cider, ale, molasses, sugar, flour, biscuit 
bread, tobacco, salt fish, cocoanut, logwood, brandy, and 
numerous other articles; an ad valorem duty of three 
per cent, on all imports not enumerated, salt excepted; 
and a duty of ten shillings per head on negro slaves 
brought directly from Africa, and twenty shillings on 
those brought from other places.'^ The ad valorem 
duty was based on the valuation of the goods at the 
place from which they were imported, as shown by the 
shipper's invoice. The export duty on furs and skins 
was continued and a duty was levied on the exportation 
of Indian slaves and cedar timber. To encourage ship- 
building, it was provided that vessels built and owned 
in the province should pay half duties, and those built 
elsewhere, but owned in the province should pay two- 
thirds.^ 

^statutes, II, 64-68. 

2/6id., 96. 

3 The principal object in making this distinction was the desire to 
check what was threatening to prove a very serious evil. The settlers 
to the northward were beginning to regard South Carolina as the best 
place to dispose of their criminal and unruly slaves. 

*Ibid., 200-206. 



286 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

This act remained in force until replaced by a similar 
one, June 30, 1716.^ The ad valorem duty on non- 
enumerated goods was increased five per cent. A law 
of December 11, 1717, not only further increased this 
to ten per cent., but also raised the specific duties. By 
an additional act of the same date, ships built and 
wholly owned in the province were allowed to carry 
all goods duty free, those built in the province and 
owned elsewhere were to pay one-half the regular rate, 
and those built elsewhere, but owned in the province, 
three-fourths.^ 

The British merchants and ship-builders of course 
complained of this attempt of the colony to apply the 
principles of protection. The king in council, on the 
recommendation of the Board of Trade, declared the 
objectionable acts null and void and forbade the pro- 
prietors and the colonial assembly to make any attempt 
to enforce them. Governor Johnson was at once noti- 
fied by the proprietors that they had been pleased to 
repeal the laws in question.^ 

A new measure, passed March 20, 1719, admitted 
goods from Great Britain and Ireland free of duty. 
For some reason this was also repealed by the pro- 
prietors, but was kept in force until replaced by the 
act of 1721.* All discriminations were removed by a 
law of 1723, and the result was a decided increase in the 

1 statutes, II, 649-661. 

2 Ibid., Ill, 27-30, 32-33. 

^Public Records, Ms., VII, llG-117, 121, 122-124, 131-133; Chalmers 
Colonial Opiniotis, 586-587; Statutes, III, 30-31, 33. 
* Statutes, III, 56-69, 159-170. 



FINANCIAL HISTOKY 287 

revenues.^ Subsequent acts were passed in 1740 and 
1751, the last being the well known general duty law, 
which was continued from time to time until March 4, 
1776.=^ 

A large part of the revenue arising under these laws 
was appropriated to specific purposes while the re- 
mainder went into the public treasury. The duty on 
negroes was intended to be partially prohibitive, since 
the rapidly increasing slave population was a menace 
to the province. The fund derived from this x)artic- 
ular source was, by the laws of 1740 and 1751, mostly 
appropriated toward bringing poor whites from Europe 
and settling them in the frontier townships. The law 
of 1751 applied one-fifth of the sum to the payment of 
bounties for the encouragement of ship-building in the 
province. Out of the duties on liquor and various 
goods imported and exported came the yearly salaries 
of the ministers, clerks, and sextons of the different 
parishes, and of the masters of the free school in 
Charleston, and annual grants of £1,500 for the build- 
ing of St. Michael's church, £200 for the erection of a 
parsonage, £200 for keeping St. Philip's church in 
repair, £2,500 for building a state house, and £5,000 
for fortifications. The surplus went into the public 
treasury.^ The duties for the year ending Febiniary 
15, 1725, amounted to £14,991:4:3 currency,' and for 
the years 1746, 1747, and 1748 averaged £23,848.'* 

^statutes, III, 193-204. 

f^Ibid., 556-568, 739-751, IV, 38-42, 264-265, 332. 
3 Ibid., Ill, 742, 749-750. 
* Public Records, Ms., XI, 402. 

5 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXV, 84-85. These figures are ex- 
pressed in currency. To get the sterling value, divide by seven. 



288 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

The revenues of the province were further increased 
by a duty of one-half pound of powder per ton on all 
vessels coming into the harbor, and by small license fees 
required of retail liquor dealers and Indian traders.* 
These taxes were levied by acts of the general assembly 
and collected by provincial officials. In addition there 
were the fees of the various crown and provincial 
officers and the usual fines and forfeitures, likewise 
regulated by statute, and finally, the quit rents, fixed 
by contract between the proprietors and settlers, or, 
after 1729, between the king and settlers, ratified by 
the laws of 1696 and 1731, and collected by officials 
appointed by and acting under the proprietors or the 
crown. 

Taking the year 1746 as an average, we find the total 
revenue approximately as follows : 

Direct taxes £52,827 

Duties 23,848 

Liquor licenses 2,661 

Fines and forfeitures 287 

Quit rents 7,000 

Total £86,623 2 

A small additional sum was derived from the sale of 
licenses to Indian traders, but the exact amount is not 
known. It was, perhaps, barely enough to pay the 
salary of the Indian commissioner and other necessary 
expenses of the system. 

^statutes, II, 20-21, 42-^4, 82-84, 85-86, 113-115, 198-199, 309, 
III, 142-143, 449, 588-590. 

2 Ibid., Ill, 696 ; Com. House Journals, Ms., XXV, 84-85, XXII, 593 ; 
Public Records, Ms., XX, 355; Ms. volume in the office of the Secretary 
of State entitled Quit Refits, 23. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 289 

The dynamics of the revenue system is practically 
the constitutional history of South Carolina. The op- 
position to the parliamentaiy schemes of taxation after 
1763 was not a mere pretext to bring on rebellion and 
secure independence. It was the assertion of a prin- 
ciple which for many years had been a part of the un- 
written constitution of the colony. In tracing the 
development of this principle, we are reminded more 
and more of the similarity between the history of the 
province and that of the mother country. 

Although the currency question was all-important 
during the administrations of Nicholson and Middleton 
(1721-1730), there were several disputes over the sub- 
ject of money bills. The estimate of expenses for the 
year 1722 was made by a joint committee from both 
houses. The assembly made some changes and sent 
it to the council. The confused ideas in regard to the 
position of the council are shown by the fact that the 
message in reply was signed by the governor. That 
is, as a member of the second branch of the legislature, 
he was considering a measure which he must ultimately 
pass upon as the third branch. Objection was made to 
several articles in the estimate, particularly one allow- 
ing Mr. Joseph Boone £1,500 for his services as agent 
in England, and another allowing Mr. Trott £1,000 for 
printing the laws of the province. The point to be 
noted is that the lower house considered these amend- 
ments and alterations and agreed to those relating to 
Boone and Trott.^ 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 191-192, 195-196; Statutes, III, 191. 
19 



290 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

A controversy in 1723 over the salary of the clerk of 
the council resulted in a further confirmation of the 
right of the upper house to amend money bills. Dur- 
ing the proprietary period, the secretary of the prov- 
ince had also acted as clerk of the council, but on Nichol- 
son 's arrival a separate clerk was appointed under a 
royal patent. Regarding this as a useless multiplica- 
tion of offices, the assembly appropriated only £200 for 
Mr. Tunley, the clerk of the council, while Mr. William 
Blakeway, their own clerk, was to receive £400. On 
the refusal of the lower house to increase Tunley 's 
allowance, the council reduced Blakeway 's to £300. 
This settlement was finally accepted.'^ 

The dispute was renewed the following year, and Mr. 
Tunley was allowed only £100, in spite of Governor 
Nicholson's remonstrances. The Governor was made 
to realize that his opposition would merely delay the 
passage of the bill and consequently the payment of 
his own salary.^ 

Still another recognition of the council's right to 
amend revenue bills was made in 1725. The lower 
house again approved Mr. Boone's claim for £1,500. 
It was unanimously rejected by the council. May 31, on 
the ground that Boone, while agent in England, had 
tried to negotiate the sale of the province, instead of 
permitting it to come under the control of the king. In 
reply to the request of the commons for a conference 
committee on the subject, they said that it would be 

1 Council Journals, Ms., II, 228, 239-240; Com. House Journals, Ms., 
VI, 221-225. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., VI, 458, 469. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 291 

useless, since their decision was iinal. Furthermore, 
they declared that they had a right to agree or disagree 
to any order, and that if the lower house should insist 
upon a conference on every subject that came up, noth- 
ing that the council did would be conclusive. The 
assembly acknowledged their right to a negative vote 
on all orders, but insisted that they had an equal right 
to demand a conference. The assembly adjourned 
from June 1 to November 1. A similar order in favor 
of Boone was sent up on the 18th of December, but it 
was ignored by the council.^ 

From these cases, it is clear that public claims were 
first passed upon by a joint committee of the two houses, 
and that the assembly repeatedly recognized the coun- 
cil's right to amend. We may say, then, that at the 
beginning of the royal period the two houses had ex- 
actly equal control over money bills. The lower house 
carried their point in reducing Tunley's allowance, but 
they failed in the Boone case. 

The first encroachments of the assembly along this 
line were made during the turbulent administration of 
President Middleton. The annual tax bill passed the 
commons house on its first reading, November 16, 1725, 
and, according to custom, was sent to the council for its 
first reading there. It received its second reading in 
the commons December 1, and was again returned to 
the council. Apparently it had been customary for the 
council to make such amendments as they desired on 
the second reading. At any rate, they inserted several 
on this occasion. The assembly struck all of them out 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 240; Council Journals, Ms., Ill, 
31-39, 248, 327. 



292 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

and passed the bill on its third reading. When the bill 
came up for its final reading in their house, the council 
again inserted the amendments. A deadlock was now 
threatened. The assembly declared that it was un- 
parliamentary to amend a bill on its third reading. 
The council maintained that the conduct of the lower 
house was also unparliamentary in striking out their 
amendments without asking for a conference. Such a 
procedure would deprive them of their undoubted right 
of framing, altering, and amending bills. In reply, 
the commons called attention to the fact that in Great 
Britain bills were amended only by the house in which 
they originated, and that amendments desired by the 
other house were sent to them before being placed in 
the bill. As this was the constant maxim in measures 
of all kinds, the argument on their side was still stronger 
in the case of money bills. The council weakened the 
force of this precedent by pointing out the great differ- 
ence between the method of procedure in Great Britain 
and that in the province. In Great Britain, as bills 
were read three times in one house before being sent to 
the other, it was necessary that all amendments should 
be concurred in by the house where the measure origin- 
ated before being made a part of the bill. The custom 
in the province, however, except for a short time during 
Nicholson's administration, had always been to read the 
measure alternately in the two houses.^ 

President Middleton interposed as a peacemaker and 
suggested that a joint committee from the two houses 
should meet and consider the best method of passing 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 256, 287, 295, 298-303, 306-307. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 293 

bills. The committee met, but could reach no agree- 
ment. The commons determined not to pass the rev- 
enue act at all unless they could carry their x^oint. 
Accordingly, they asked the president to ratify the 
other laws before him and to conclude the session as 
soon as possible. Middleton insisted that the method 
of passing bills should first be settled and threatened 
to postpone the ratification of all measures until that 
was done. After some discussion, however, the laws 
were ratified on December 9, and the assembly was pro- 
rogued to the next day.^ 

The dispute was continued into the new session. The 
council again amended the bill on its second reading. 
After some debate in the commons, "the question was 
put, whether it is the opinion of this house that the 
Council shall make any alterations in Tax Bills. ' ' This 
was carried in the negative, and a message sent to the 
council to that effect, together with the bill. The coun- 
cil refused to receive the bill until it had been read a 
third time in the assembly. At the same time they 
sent down a long message in defense of their right to 
amend revenue measures, citing the passage in the 
thirty-fifth article of Governor Nicholson's instructions 
which expressly gave them an equal power with the 
lower house in framing, amending, and altering money 
bills. In conclusion, they threatened to make an ap- 
peal to the king for a final settlement.^ 

The commons now passed the measure on its third 
reading with all the amendments struck out. The 
council yielded under protest, and consented to its final 

^ Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 30-1-310. 
^Ihid., 314-315. 



204 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

passage, alleging as a reason the necessity of securing 
supplies for the support of the government. They de- 
clared, however, that they would lay the whole affair 
before the crown. The lower house begged them to 
represent the matter in its true light and let the king 
know that it was not an act for stamping bills of credit, 
but for a tax to be raised by the people.^ At a joint 
meeting of the two houses held on December 18 for 
the purpose of ratifying the bill, Speaker Broughton 
advanced a very ingenious interpretation of the gov- 
ernor's thirty-fifth instruction. It allowed the council 
an equal power with the assembly in framing, altering, 
and amending money bills, and enjoined the governor 
not to allow the assembly or any of its members any 
power or privilege which was not permitted by the 
king to the House of Commons or the members thereof 
in England. By a process of negative reasoning, 
Broughton argued that the assembly in South Caro- 
lina possessed all the powers and privileges of the 
House of Commons. As the Commons in England had 
the sole right of framing, altering, and amending money 
bills, the representative assembly of South Carolina had 
the same right. He went on to say that the term money 
hills used in the instruction must mean paper money 
bills and not pure tax measures." 

President Middleton in his closing speech severely 
criticised the commons for their encroachments in the 
face of a positive instruction, and prorogued them to 
the second Tuesday in March,^ 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., VII, 316-317. 

2 Ibid., 319-321. 

3 Council Journals, Ms., Ill, 252-253. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 295 

This was the greatest victory yet achieved by the as- 
sembly. It was the first time tliat they had definitely 
denied the right of the council to amend money bills. 
Although there were numerous other disputes over the 
question, the advantage thus gained was never given 
up. 

The remainder of Middleton's administration was 
taken up with the controversy between the two houses 
over the issue of bills of credit. Reference has already 
been made to the arrival of Governor Johnson in De- 
cember, 1730, and to the passage of the currency and 
quit rent acts in 1731. The common interests of the 
council and assembly on the land question restored har- 
mony between them. 

The dispute in regard to the salaries of President 
Middleton and Chief Justice Wright continued for sev- 
eral years.^ Still there was no serious conflict over the 
question of money bills until 1735. A message from 
the council, dated February 7, reminded the lower house 
that no provision had been made for the chief justice 
in nearly three years and urged them to consider the 
matter. Motions to allow Judge Wright £1,400, and 
then £700, were voted down, and finally it was decided 
to strike his name out of the estimate entirely. On 
March 27 another message was received from the council 
complaining that they had received no answer to their 
message of February 7, and stating that they could not 
read the tax bill a second time until provision was made 
for the chief justice.^ 

1 For a discussion of this subject see Section I, Land System, Chap- 
ter II ; Section II, Government, Chapter I. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 58-59, 133, 183. 



296 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

The assembly now requested the immediate return 
of the tax bill, as the members wished to finish all busi- 
ness and go home for the Easter holidays. The bill 
was soon brought down, endorsed as read and passed 
a second time in the council. On proceeding to read 
it a third time, the house found that some changes had 
been made. The sum £42,992:13:6 in the title and 
preamble had been changed to £45,092:13:6, and in 
the estimate there was inserted an item of £2,100, sal- 
ary of the chief justice for three years at £700 per 
annum. The bill thus altered was unanimously re- 
jected, and the committee on the tax bill was ordered 
to draw up resolutions.^ A day later, the committee 
made the following report through their chairman, Mr. 
Charles Pinckney: 

"Resolved, That it is the Opinion of this House that it is 
the inlierent right of every Englishman not to be charged 
with any Taxes or Aids of Money, but what are given and 
granted by his Representative in Parliament. 

"Resolved, That the House of Commons have the Sole 
Right and Power over the Moneys of the People, and of 
giving and granting or denying Aids or Moneys for the Public 
Service. 

"Resolved, That the House of Commons have the first com- 
mencement and consideration and the Sole Modelling in their 
House of all Laws for imposing Taxes, and levying and 
raising aids of Money upon the People for the defense and 
support of the State and Government. 

"Resolved, That the foregoing Privileges are some of the 
Fundamental Laws, Rights, Libertys, and Customs of the 
People of England, confirmed by many Statutes and Acts of 
Parliament. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 186-188. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 297 

"Resolved, That His Majesty's Subjects of this Province 
are entitled to all the Libertys and Privileges of Englishmen. 

"Eesolved, That the Commons House of Assembly in this 
Province, by Laws and Statutes of Great Britain made of 
force in this Province, and by Acts of Assembly of this 
Province, and by ancient Usage and Custom, have the same 
Rights, PoAvers, and Privileges in regard to introducing and 
passing Laws for imposing Taxes on the People of this 
Province as the House of Commons of Great Britain have in 
introducing and passing Laws on the People of England. 

"Resolved, That after the Estimate is closed and added to 
any Tax Bill, that no additions can or ought to be made 
thereto, by any other Estate or Power whatsoever, but by and 
in the Commons House of Assembly."^ 

These resolutions were sent to the council, together 
with a message denying their right to amend money 
bills.2 

In order to give the assembly time to recover from 
their anger, they were prorogued from March 29 to 
April 15. On the 16th a new tax act was read, passed 
the first time, and sent to the council. They passed 
and returned it the next day.^ The old dispute was 
renewed. The council again cited Nicholson's thirty- 
fifth instruction, referred to in the election act, as their 
authority for claiming a right to frame, alter, and 
amend money bills, and urged the house to send up 
the estimates for their consideration.^ A committee 
of the assembly, appointed to search the journals for 

1 Co«k House Journals, Ms., IX, 190-191. 

2/6i<i., 194. 

Ubid., 201, 203. 

* Council Journals, Ms., VI, 9G-97. 



298 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

precedents, reported verbally on the 23d. They stated 
that, in the beginning of Middleton's administration in 
1725, the council claimed the right of framing, altering, 
and amending money bills, but that the lower house 
would never agree to any of their amendments. ' ' That 
a Tax Bill was lost' which had been amended by the 
Council. And at another time when amendments were 
made in a Tax Bill by the Council, the lower house 
struck the same out and sent the Bill back as it was 
first framed in the Commons House; and that the 
Council in the end gave up the Point. ' ' A message to 
the council denied that the reference in the election 
law to Governor Nicholson's thirty-fifth instruction 
could give them any power "in derogation to the Fun- 
damental Eights of the Commons House." As was 
usually the case in such controversies, the council finally 
yielded, and on April 25 the bill was passed on its 
third reading without alteration. It was ratified on 
the 28th.^ 

Governor Johnson died May 3, 1735,^ and, in accord- 
ance with the royal instructions, was succeeded by his 
brother-in-law, Lieutenant-Governor Thomas Brough- 
ton. 

For the second time the responsibilities of govern- 
ment fell upon a resident of the province. Broughton 
was more tactful and less obstinate than Middleton. 
In the main, he continued Johnson's policy. Taking 
a firm stand in defense of the royal prerogative, he 
was wise enough to see how far he could push his 
claims and when he must yield. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 219-221, 257. 
^Public Records, Ms., XVII, 310. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 299 

The dispute over the allowance to the chief justice 
was soon renewed. Judge AYright appealed to the 
British Board of Trade to see that his salary and ar- 
rears were paid. Having taken the matter under con- 
sideration and heard arguments from Mr. Fury and 
Mr. Yonge, agents of the province, Mr. Shelton, secre- 
tary to the late Lords Proprietors, and Mr. Hume, 
former speaker of the assembly, they issued an order, 
June 10, 1735, that a report should be prepared in 
favor of the petition. A warrant was issued by the 
queen providing that the chief justice should in the 
future be paid a salary of £1,000 currency per annum 
out of the quit rents. ^ 

The annual tax bill passed its first reading in the 
council, January 30, 1736, and was sent down to the 
assembly, together with a message from the lieutenant- 
governor, complaining that no provision had been made 
for the chief justice for four years, and calling attention 
to the fact that Her Majesty had in a special manner 
signified her pleasure therein.^ The house seems to 
have disregarded this appeal, for Broughton sent them 
another message on the 19th, expressing surprise that 
Wright's name was not in the estimate just sent up, 
and again reminding them of the royal pleasure. 
Along with this were enclosed copies of the report of 
the Board of Trade on Wright's petition, and of the 
queen's warrant for fixing a salary of £1,000 currency 
upon the chief justice.^ 

^Public Records, Ms., XVII, 257-259, 319-321; Com. House 
Journals, Ms., IX, 535-536; Council Journals, Ms., VI, 359. The war- 
rant was signed by the queen, probably while George II was on one of 
his trips to Hanover. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., VI, 177. 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 535-536. 



300 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Four days later, another communication was received 
from the lieutenant-governor stating that the delay of 
the council in reading the tax bill a second time was 
due to the fact that they were waiting for an answer to 
their message of the 19th. The assembly replied that 
they would consider the message when the tax bill was 
sent down to them and not before.^ The bill was ac- 
cordingly passed and sent to them on the 25th. The 
message of the 19th, the report of the Lords of Trade, 
and the queen's warrant were then taken under consid- 
eration, and the question, ''AVhether the Chief Justice 
shall have any Allowance made to him in this Esti- 
mate," was carried in the negative.^ In a message to 
the council, they declared that the Lords of Trade had 
been imposed upon, for the chief justice had never been 
paid a regular salary, but only allowances for special 
services. Propositions to provide for him had been 
voted down for three years past and they could not now 
see any new reasons why he should be given an allow- 
ance. Broughton expressed great surprise that they 
should dare to say that their lordships had been im- 
posed upon, and conclude that the queen's warrant 
afforded no new reason for providing for the chief 
justice.'^ 

A committee of the house reported a long message to 
be sent to the council giving five reasons why a regular 
salary should not be paid to the chief justice out of the 
provincial treasury. The sum and substance was that 
in all the other provinces this official was paid either 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., IX, 560-561. 

^Ihid., 567, 573. 

»IUd., 596-597, 615-616. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 301 

by the king or by the proprietors. The report went on 
to state that, out of respect for Her Majesty's recom- 
mendation, they were willing to allow Wright £700 in 
full settlement of all his claims. In considering the 
report, however, the house struck out even this con- 
cession.^ 

The lieutenant-governor again sent down the queen's 
warrant, but it was at once returned. Broughton con- 
tinued his remonstrances, and finally, on May 26, the 
assembly voted to insert this item in the estimate, ' ' To 
the Chief Justice in full of all his Services, £700." 
The council having agreed, the bill became a law on 
May 29.' 

The three years provided by law for the duration of 
general assemblies having almost expired, this assembly 
was dissolved on September 30, 1736, and writs were 
issued for a new election returnable November 10.^ 
Among those elected were Charles Pinckney, Benjamin 
Whitaker, Isaac Mazyck, Maurice Lewis, William Tre- 
win, Andrew Rutledge, and others who were becoming 
prominent in the aifairs of the province. Charles 
Pinckney, who had drawn up the spirited resolutions 
maintaining the sole control of the lower house over 
money bills, was elected speaker. In his presentation 
speech he followed the precedent set by Captain Dry 
and demanded the preservation and protection of the 
known privileges of the house.^ 

1 Com. Bouse Journals, Ms., IX, G51-656. 

2/fcid., 662-663, 707, X, 8, 11; Council Journals, Ms., VI, 274-275; 
Statutes, III, 438-448. 

^Council Journals, Ms., VI, 300. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 97-100. 



302 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

The question of the chief justice's salary came up 
once more. On December 17, Lieutenant-Governor 
Broughton sent down a message saying that Judge 
Wright had received only £1,400 for the five years of his 
service, though his predecessor, Mr. Allein, had been 
paid £1,000 yearly. Accordingly there was due £3,600, 
which he urged the house to provide, in obedience to 
Her Majesty's sign manual. He concluded with the 
information that the queen had ordered for the future 
that the chief justice should be paid £1,000 annually 
by the receiver-general out of the quit rents. The 
house replied that they had already donated £700 to 
"Wright, which was pay in full for all of his claims.^ 

The assembly won another victory during this ses- 
sion which was of still more constitutional importance. 
The tax bill passed its second reading in the house, 
February 8, 1737, and was sent up to the council along 
with the estimate for the year.^ The regular method 
of framing the estimate had long been by a joint com- 
mittee on petitions and accounts chosen from both 
houses. In the South Carolina Gazette for January 
18, 1735, there appeared an advertisement notifying 
all who had accounts against the public to bring them 
to the clerk of the commons house of assembly before 
the first Tuesday in February. Whether this was the 
beginning of the custom is not clear, but, at any rate, 
from this time on, accounts were examined by a com- 
mittee of the lower house only, and the council had 
no share in framing the estimate. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 347; Council Journals, Ms., VI, 
358-359. 

2 Corn. House Journals, Ms., X, 399. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 303 

On February 23, the council sent down a message de- 
siring a conference committee on the estimate. Tlie 
commons replied that their house could not be justified 
by the usage of parliament in appointing a committee 
to confer with the council on supplies granted to His 
Majesty. To this the answer was returned that it was 
no new thing for the houses to confer on the estimates 
of the year, as would be seen by a perusal of their 
journals. The house was also reminded that accounts 
had formerly been examined by a joint committee of 
both houses, though the assembly had now assumed to 
themselves the power of examining them before a com- 
mittee of their own house only. The lower house ac- 
knowledged that precedents might be found to support 
the claims of the council, but insisted that no precedent 
would ever be "able to supersede the rights which 
every English subject derives from the ancient and 
fundamental constitutions of the country on which he 
depends. ' ' Furthemiore, the business of granting sup- 
plies to His Majesty and appropriating them to what- 
ever purposes they thought proper was the sole and 
undoubted privilege of their house. The council passed 
the bill on its second reading, but sent down a protest 
against the claims of the assembly.^ 

Before it was finally enacted into a law, an absurd 
incident occurred which serves to show how tenacious 
the assembly were of their privileges and how ready 
they were to humiliate the council. The bill had its 
third reading in the lower house on March 1. A day 
later a message from the council was received com- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., X, 433-434, 439-440, 442-443, 447-448. 



304 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

plaining that the name of Mr. Secretary Hammerton 
had been erased from the estimate, and in a paragraph 
marked (A) some absurd and ludicrous lines inserted 
by the clerk of the assembly, which were very insulting 
and unparliamentary.^ In reply the assembly said 
that, in the original estimate, Mr. Hammerton had been 
addressed simply as ''John Hammerton, Esq." He 
became angry at this, and they changed it to "The 
Honorable John Hammerton, Esq." As the council 
had taken umbrage, they beg to be told all the gentle- 
man's styles and titles so they can address him accord- 
ingly. The message added that some other words were 
added during the debate, which were afterwards struck 
out by the house. The offensive words having been 
expunged before the bill was sent up, they could not, 
contended the assembly, be taken notice of by any rules 
of parliamentary procedure.^ 

In spite of this dispute, the bill passed the council on 
March 2. They insisted, however, that the author of 
the witticism should be reprimanded and expressed 
regrets that the lower house should speak so disrespect- 
fully of the council and its members. Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Broughton sent a message to the same effect.^ 
The assembly became very indignant and at once drew 
up and transmitted to the council a long series of reso- 
lutions, of which the following are fair samples: 

''Resolved, That the Freedom of Speech and Debate on 
proceedings in the Commons House of Assembly ought not 

1 Council Joxirnals, Ms., VI, 458, 459. 

2 Ibid., 462^63. 
'Ibid., 469-470. 



FINANCIAL IIISTOEY 305 

to be examined and questioned in any place out of the said 
House. 

"Resolved, That the Governor of this Province ought not 
to take notice of any Proceedings in the said House but when 
the same is properly laid before him in a Parliamentary way. 

"Resolved, That it is a Breach of the Privileges of this 
House for the Governor or Commander in Chief for the time 
being to take any notice of any differences between the two 
Houses about their Privileges, with which he is not concerned. 

"Resolved, That this House will not further proceed upon 
any business before them, until they have received satisfaction 
concerning their Privileges."^ 

Broughton hastened to assure them that lie had no 
intention of invading the rights and privileges of the 
assembly, for they were the rights of all the commons 
of Sonth Carolina and he would always support them 
to the utmost extent of his power." 

The assembly were not satisfied even after they had 
gained the sole power of framing and amending money 
bills. They must make sure that the money was spent 
for the purposes for which it was voted. Six thousand 
pounds were appropriated in 1737 for the expenses of 
an expedition against the Spaniards and Indians and 
provision was made that it should be paid out by the 
treasurer, only on orders drawn by the lieutenant-gov- 
ernor, council, and a committee of the assembly. As 
the council said, this was contrary to the governor's 
instruction forbidding the payment of any money from 
the public treasury except by warrant under his hand. 
The committee sat during the recess of the assembly, 

^Council Journals, Ms., VI, 470-471. 
2 Ibid., 472. 
20 



306 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

and not only joined in signing warrants on tlie treas- 
urer, but also took part in regulating the details of the 
expedition.^ 

Lieutenant-Governor Broughton died November 22, 

1737. Arthur Middleton had died on the 6th of Sep- 
tember, so the government now devolved upon William 
Bull, the eldest councilor.^ Colonel Bull presided over 
the government until Governor Glen's arrival in 1743. 
He was commissioned lieutenant-governor in June, 

1738. There were three important constitutional ad- 
vances made during his administration: the governor 
was excluded from the council when sitting in their 
legislative capacity; the assembly extended their con- 
trol over money bills; and, finally, the assembly suc- 
ceeded in electing a public treasurer against the will 
of the lieutenant-governor and council. 

Reference has already been made to the resolution 
of the upper house, adopted April 11, 1739, not to enter 
into any debates during the presence of the governor 
or acting governor.^ 

The chief dispute over a money bill also came in this 
year. The commons, as usual, took advantage of the 
misfortunes of the j^rovince to force the council to 
agree to their encroachments. The naval war between 
England and Spain was about to begin in Europe, and 
it was naturally to be expected that hostilities would 
be resumed between the South Carolina settlers and 

i Council Journals, Ms., VI, 481, 487-494, XIII, 144-145; Statutes, 
III, 484. See Chapter V, Militia and Defence, section on Indian Affairs, 
220-221. 

^Public Records, Ms., XVIII., 312. 

3 See Chapter II, The Legislature, 92-93. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 307 

the Spanish colony at St. Augustine. The Spanish 
were in the habit of enticing slaves to run away from 
their masters and come to St. Augustine. They had 
orders from the king of Spain to free all negroes thus 
escaping and were forbidden to return them to their 
owners. Attempts to incite the slaves to rebel resulted 
in the Stono insurrection, September, 1739, in which 
over sixty lives were lost. ^ While their country was 
thus subjected to dangers both without and within, the 
two houses of assembly spent the time disputing over 
powers and privileges. 

An explanatory bill for keeping and maintaining a 
watch in Chai'leston was amended by the council on its 
second reading. The lower house struck out these 
amendments on their third reading, whereupon the 
council sent down a message stating that their conduct 
was very unparliamentary and asking for a conference 
to discuss the matter.^ In reply the assembly main- 
tained that the measure under discussion was a tax bill 
and that the attempt of the council to amend it was 
unparliamentary. They concluded with the declaration 
that they possessed the sole power of framing bills for 
granting to His Majesty taxes, aids, or subsidies, and 
amending or altering the same upon the first, second, 
or third reading whenever they should think it fit and 
necessary.^ 

The dispute now turned upon another bill. An act 
for levying an import duty on negroes, liquor, and 

1 See McCrady, S. Car. under Royal Govt., 185-187. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., VII, 201-202. 

3 Ibid., 208-209. 



308 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

merchandise, usually called the general duty act, was 
amended in the council. The assembly at once ad- 
vanced the plea that this also was a tax measure and 
could not be interfered with. With some show of 
spirit, the council declared that they would not suffer 
any law to pass their house until it had been submitted 
to such alterations as they thought necessary for His 
Majesty's service.^ 

Numerous messages on the subject passed between 
the houses. The council maintained that, b}'' the thirty- 
fifth article of Governor Nicholson's instructions, made 
a law of the land by the election act, they possessed an 
equal right with the lower house in framing, altering, 
and amending money bills. The assembly, on the other 
hand, affirmed that they had all the powers and privi- 
leges of the British House of Commons and hence the 
sole control over all supply bills. The council now 
informed the assembly, that, as they evidently did not 
intend to proceed to business, they had advised the 
lieutenant-governor to adjourn them for a time. The 
reply was that the commons house had the right to 
adjourn themselves, and that the king's power was to 
call, prorogue, and dissolve. Further, they said that, 
in answer to a request, they had just received permis- 
sion from the lieutenant-governor to adjourn them- 
selves. ^ 

After a six months' vacation, the general assembly 
met again on May 29. A message was received from 
the upper house stating that the tax bill was before 

1 Council Journals, Ms., VII, 215-216. 
Ubid., 221-223. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 309 

them for a second reading', but in the estimate annexed 
there was a list of sums of money to be paid to various 
people without expressing in many cases for what ser- 
vices. They went on to say that they could not proceed 
with the bill until all the accounts and vouchers were 
laid before them. Finally, there were many sums of 
money due to different persons which were not in the 
estimate at all.^ 

A committee of the lower house, appointed to draw 
up reasons in support of their privileges, made a report 
on June 5. The document fills fourteen closely written 
pages. Perhaps the most important part is a short 
paragraph in which the force of royal instructions is 
questioned. Speaking of the thirty-fifth article of 
Nicholson's instructions, they say: 

"A Power to abrogate old Laws or impose new ones upon 
the People without their consent is a Prerogative that the 
Crown never exercised or assumed to itself over any part 
of the Realm. But a Concession that a Royal Order can 
qualify or anywise alter a fundamental right from the shape 
in which it w^as handed down to us from our Ancestors, is 
an Acknowledgment of such a Prerogative to all Intents and 
Purposes. The power of raising and levying of money is 
of the many Privileges we enjoy, the most essential, and upon 
which all the rest seem to depend. If the Comer Stone is 
once removed, the Superstructure of course will fall to the 
ground."^ 

The dispute continuing, the council appealed to 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull to come to their aid. They 
said that the assembly had acted contrary to custom 

1 Council Journals, Ms., VII, 226-229. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XII, 70, 84, 76-77. 



310 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

in refusing a conference on tlieir amendments to the 
watch bill, in refusing to allow them to amend a duty 
bill as they had always done, in examining the treas- 
urer's accounts without the aid of the upper house, and 
in examining petitions and accounts and putting them 
in the estimate without submitting them to the inspec- 
tion of the upper house. Finally, they had heard that 
the commons questioned their authority to sit as an 
upper house. They called upon the lieutenant-governor 
to support the king's prerogative and either prorogue 
or dissolve the assembly. Bull replied that he could 
not consent to a prorogation as the duty law would soon 
expire and must be renewed at once. Further, that he 
would take no part in the dispute other than to send 
a copy of his instructions to the assembly. That body 
hastened to inform him that they had in no ways acted 
contrary to the instructions and that they were ready to 
grant supplies to His Majesty. As the tax bill had 
been before the council since March 2 and they showed 
no inclination to return it, the assembly begged leave to 
adjourn to the first Tuesday in September. Colonel 
Bull saw that it would be useless for the houses to sit 
longer at that time and permitted the adjournment.^ 

Before the time for their meeting arrived, Bull 
heeded the advice of his council, dissolved the assembly, 
and issued writs for a new election returnable on Sep- 
tember 12.- On account of a yellow fever epidemic, a 

1 Council Joxirnals, Ms., VII, 241-248. 

2 The journals make no mention of this, so the exact date of the dis- 
solution cannot be found. At any rate a new assembly met on Sep- 
tember 12. 



rmANCIAL HISTOEY 311 

quorum could not be secured until the 6tli of November. ^ 
Charles Pinckney was again elected speaker.^ 

The first business to come up was in regard to the 
tax bill. It passed the house on its first reading and 
was sent to the council. They replied that they would 
not pass it until a committee from their house was 
allowed to join an assembly committee to consider 
petitions and accounts. In answer to tliis, the assem- 
bly agreed to send up the accounts, but said that they 
could not appoint a conference committee without giv- 
ing up their rights as Englishmen.' The council stood 
firm, and a legislative deadlock was the result. Finally, 
on December 8, after the tax bill had been before the 
council for a month, the houses agreed to appoint a 
joint committee to confer on a method of passing bills. 
The plan as adopted by both houses has been given in 
the chapter on the legislature. The chief question 
at issue was settled by an agreement that the council 
might draw up on a separate schedule such amendments 
as they desired to make to a subsidy bill. Those that 
were approved by the lower house would be inserted 
in the body of the bill. Neither house was willing 
to have the settlement regarded as a precedent. The 
council maintained that they had suspended their right 
to have a committee from their house meet a committee 
of the assembly on petitions and accounts only because 
the danger from foreign war and domestic insurrection 
made it necessary. The commons at once resolved that 

1 Public Records, Ms., XX, 192-194. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XII, 105. 
UUd., 154-155, 161. 



312 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

the council had no right to appoint a committee to confer 
on petitions and accounts, and declared that they would 
not permit it at any time in the future. Furthermore, 
their house already possessed the sole control over 
money bills, and they had agreed to a conference on the 
subject merely to preserve harmony.^ 

After this compromise had been agreed uj)on, the 
tax bill was passed, December 17, 1739, and the assem- 
bly adjourned for the holidays. 

The remaining four years of Bull's administration 
were quiet and peaceful, the appointment of a public 
treasurer having furnished the only serious cause for 
dispute between the houses. Early in March, 1743, 
Treasurer Gabriel Manigault sent a memorial to the 
general assembly asking leave to resign. By a statute 
of September 20, 1721, the right of electing this official 
was, as we have seen, vested in the general assembly.^ 
An earlier act of 1707 giving the lower house the sole 
control was superseded.^ Relying upon the equal 
power thus guaranteed to them by law, the council sent 
down a message, March 24, recommending Colonel 
Othniel Beale for the vacancy.* The assembly disre- 
garded this communication, and, just one week later, 
resolved that Mr. Jacob Motte, a member of their house, 
should be public treasurer. Beale 's name was not con- 
sidered, though others were. Later in the day an 
ordinance was received from the council for appoint- 
ing Beale. It was amended by the substitution of 

iCoTO. House Journals, Ms., XII, 188-191, 195, 211-212, 222. 

2 Statutes, III, 148-149. See introductory chapter. 

s/bid., II, 299. 

* Com. House Jottrnals, Ms., XVIII, 608-609. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 313 

Motte's name aud then returned. The council agai 
inserted Beale's name and passed the ordinance on its 
second reading. The house did the same, substituting 
Motte's name. Ee-inserting Beale's name, the council 
passed it on its third reading. Nothing more was done 
until April 9, when the council sent down a message 
expressing surprise that the house still retained the 
ordinance and urging the necessity of its immediate 
passage. The reply to this was that Manigault had 
not been given leave to resign, hence the office was not 
yet vacant. On the 26th, the assembly proceeded to a 
third reading of the ordinance and sent up a message 
desiring a conference. Committees were accordingly 
named by both houses. The assembly committee re- 
ported on the 28tli that they could come to no agree- 
ment, since they adhered to Motte and the council 
committee to Beale. They were ordered out again and 
urged to use their best efforts to secure an agreement 
on Motte, but failing in this, to suggest William Cattell, 
Jr., as a compromise. The committee reported on the 
next day that the council committee would not agree 
on Motte, that they suggested Cattell, and the committee 
went back to their house for instructions.' 

Motte now went to Beale and proposed to divide the 
profits of the office with him for three or four years, 
if he would go on his security and pay one-half of the 
clerk's wages. Beale agreed and promised to use his 
influence in Motte 's behalf. A message was sent to the 
assembly on the 29th agreeing to Motte 's election.^ 

J Com. House Journals, Als., XVIII, G71, 681-682, 688, 691-692, 740- 
741, 745, 752, 761-762. 

^Ibid., 769, 776-777. 



314 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

After the death of Governor Johnson in 1735, there 
was some trouble in securing a i^roper person to succeed 
him. Colonel Samuel Horsey was appointed early in 
1738, but he died before his commission and instructions 
were completed.^ In November of the same year a 
commission was drawn up for James Glen.^ He did 
not come out to the province for several years, however, 
and the government, as we have seen, was administered 
by Lieutenant-Governor Bull. Glen was a young 
Scotchman of some tact and ability, but utterly without 
experience in colonial affairs. During his administra- 
tion of thirteen years, the assembly increased their in- 
fluence at the expense of the governor and council. 
Strange to say, no one was more responsible for this 
than the governor himself, for he made the serious mis- 
take of quarreling with his council and trying to make 
friends with the assembly. The dispute with the coun- 
cil has already been considered in another connection.^ 
It grew out of their determination to exclude the gover- 
nor from the sittings of the upper house. His denial 
of their right to sit alone as a branch of the legislature 
gave great encouragement to the assembly. 

On the whole. Glen's administration was character- 
ized by very few specific encroachments of the assembly 
upon the governor and council. It was rather a period 
during which the assembly continually made use of the 
powers they had gained until they became a part of the 
unwritten constitution of the province. Scarcely a year 

1 Puilic Records, Ms., XIX, 5, 297. 

2 Ibid., 299-318. 

3 See Chapter II, The Legislature. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 315 

passed that tliere was not a dispute of some kind over 
a money bill, and the lower house was almost invariably 
the victor. Some of the more important of these con- 
flicts will be discussed, even at the risk of being tedious. 
Nothing, it seems to me, will illustrate better the grad- 
ual development of those principles of government for 
which South Carolina fought in the Revolution. ' ' The 
spirit of 1776 ' ' was not a sudden and unexpected prod- 
uct of ministerial tyranny. It was the spirit of 1719, 
the spirit of 1750, grown stronger and more determined, 
under the influence of forces, differing, perhaps in de- 
gree, but not in kind, from those in operation during 
the whole colonial period. 

His Excellency arrived in Charleston, December 17, 
1743, and at once assumed the reins of government.^ 
By the first article of his instructions the following 
were named as councilors: William Bull, Alexander 
Skene, James Kinlock, Robert Wright, John Fenwicke, 
Joseph Wragg, Thomas Waring, John Hammerton, 
John Colleton, John Braithwaite, James Crokatt, and 
Edmund Atkin. In addition, the surveyor-general of 
the customs for the southern district of America was to 
sit in the council as a member extraordinary.^ Of 
these, all but the last four were named in Johnson's 
instructions. Judge Wright, however, had died of yel- 
low fever in 1739 and Mr. Crokatt had removed to 
London.'' 

As usual the houses were soon involved in a dispute 
over money bills. The council passed the annual tax 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XI, 1-2. 

2 Ibid., 16-17; Public Records, Ms., XX, 66-67. 
'S. Car. Gazette, No. 279, June 9, 1739. 



316 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

bill on its first reading, on February 19, 1745, and sent 
down a message stating their objections to the clause 
which obliged all taxable persons to make return on 
oath of their money out at interest and of all cash in 
hand exceeding two thousand pounds currency.' The 
assembly entirely disregarded the message and again 
passed the bill in its original form. The council passed 
it a second time on May 17, and, in accordance with 
the rule of December 11, 1739, sent down a separate 
schedule of amendments.^ This was likewise disre- 
garded and the bill put to its final passage in the as- 
sembly. It came up for its third reading in the council 
on May 23. A message was sent to the lower house 
complaining that no attention had been paid to their 
amendments, suggested on the first and second read- 
ings, and again insisting that the oath clause should 
be omitted. The lower house still refused to make the 
change desired and the bill was rejected by the council.^ 
The assembly adjourned on the 25th, but as their term 
was about to expire by law, they were soon after dis- 
solved and a new election called. 

The writs were made returnable on September 10, but 
the assembly was prorogued from time to time, and a 
quorum for business did not meet until December 4. 
Among the members returned were Othniel Beale, 
Gabriel Manigault, Samuel Eveleigh, Robert Brewton, 
Elias Horry, Isaac Mazyck, Thomas Drayton, George 
Saxby, Andrew Rutledge, William Pinckney, and Ste- 
phen Bull. William Bull, Jr., was again elected 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XIII, 44-46. 

2 Ibid., 216-217. 
^Ihid., 233-234, 239. 



FIXANCIAL HISTORY 317 

speaker.^ After a very brief session, an adjournment 
was taken to January 7, 1746 ^ The first business that 
came up was in regard to the tax bill. In the election 
just held the question of requiring persons to make 
oath as to the amount of money which they had on hand 
and out at interest may have been the principal issue. 
At all events, when the bill came before the assembly 
for its second reading on Januarj^ 20, a motion to insert 
the mooted clause was defeated by the vote of the 
speaker.** This was a victory for the council. A few 
days later, the bill was sent down by the council with 
a schedule of seven proposed amendments. On ex- 
amining the bill and finding that the council had not 
endorsed it as passing on its second reading, the as- 
sembly returned it for endorsement. The upper house 
became angry and declared that they should certainly 
have been given an answer to their message. How- 
ever, for the sake of the public welfare, they agreed to 
pass the measure. It was finally enacted into a law 
on June 17, the council amendments being entirely dis- 
regarded.* 

Another feeble attempt of the council to interfere in 
a money bill, made in April, 1747, was equally futile. 
They informed the lower house by message that they 
had directed their committee on Indian affairs to join 
the house committee in a conference to consider the 
papers laid before them by the governor, adding that 

1 Cow. House Journals, Ms., XXI, 1, 45. 

UUd., 71. 

'-Ihid., 1C8-169. 

^Ihid., 189-193, 200-201, 210-211; Statutes, III, 678. 



318 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

they had obtained the estimates of expense and other 
papers and given them in charge to their committee. 
The assembly resolved '^not to confer with the com- 
mittee of the Upper House of Assembly on any esti- 
mate of expense whatever."^ 

The next move of the assembly was to deny the right 
of the council even to suggest amendments to a revenue 
measure. The rule adopted in 1739 allowed them to 
submit amendments on a separate schedule. Fourteen 
amendments to the annual tax bill were thus sent down 
to the lower house, June 27, 1748. A motion to reject 
them as a whole failed, and three were accepted and 
incorporated in the bill. Two days later, the upper 
house complained because only three of their amend- 
ments had been accepted and urged the assembly to 
reconsider them. This was done and four more were 
agreed to. At the same time resolutions were passed 
to the effect that such compliance should not be drawn 
into precedent, and 'Hhat no agreement should at any 
time be made with the Council to countenance or war- 
rant their sending any Schedule of Amendments at any 
time to the Tax Bill or Estimate or any Subsidy Bill. ' ' " 

Governor Glen also became involved in the contro- 
versy and aroused the indignation of the assembly, A 
clause in the bill imposed a tax upon officers' salaries 
and upon the governor 's house rent. Glen, as the party 
most interested, sent a message of protest to the house 
on the 27th. They resolved that he had greatly in- 
fringed their privileges in taking notice of a tax bill 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXII, 492-494. 
Ubid., XXIII, 659-663, 678-679, 691. 



FINANCIAL HISTOEY 319 

or any other measure before it came up for his official 
consideration. He hastened to apologize for his inad- 
vertency and harmony was again restored/ 

The assembly were not satisfied with the sole power 
of framing the anjQual tax bill. Their control over 
revenue measures of all kinds was made an excuse for 
continued encroachments upon the governor and coun- 
cil. A dispute over the reorganization of the provin- 
cial navy resulted in the assertion of a very broad 
claim, which was, however, soon abandoned. The navy 
consisted of two small scout boats built to patrol the 
southern frontier and prevent the escape of runaway 
slaves to St. Augustine. These boats were out of ser- 
vice for some time, and the number of slave desertions 
had increased. The assembly resolved, on April 4, 1749, 
to defray the expenses of equipping the boats, and re- 
quested the governor to appoint the commanders and 
give directions for raising the men. Glen submitted 
their message to the council, and they sent for the com- 
missary to make an estimate of the expense. They 
resolved that his estimate of £4,000 per annum was too 
great an outlay for the province to make, except on the 
most urgent necessity. On being informed of this, the 
assembly retorted that they regarded their house as the 
only proper judge of any expense necessary to be en- 
tered into. Glen succeeded in convincing them that a 
recognition of this claim would exclude the governor and 
council from any share in legislation, for they assured 
him that the claim had been made through inadvertence. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXII, 663, 700-701, 704-705. 



320 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

But at the same time, they adopted a resolution to the 
effect that they possessed all the powers and privileges 
of the British House of Commons in regard to money 
bills. ' 

Toward the close of this year (1749), there occurred 
another dispute, in the course of which the council de- 
fined their idea of a money bill. A bill to encourage 
the making of potash provided that a certain sum of 
money should be loaned to a Mr. Stephens for five 
years to purchase slaves. The council amended it by 
increasing the amount to be loaned. The assembly at 
once resolved that they had the sole right of granting 
all suj^plies and that no other legislative body had any 
right to increase or diminish any grant made by them 
whereby a tax or duty was to be imposed.^ 

In reply, the council denied the sole power of the 
lower house to grant money, but stated that they would 
waive all arguments on that point and show that the 
potash bill was not a money bill and would not be so 
considered by the House of Commons in Great Britain. 
Money bills were only those in which the following or 
similar words were used: "We His Majesty's dutiful 
and Loyal subjects, the Commons of England (or of 
Great Britain), in Parliament assembled, do cheerfully 
give and grant." Bills in which this style was not 
used were never regarded as money bills. They cited 
a number of examples in support of their assertion, 
such as the act 2 George II, chapter 35, for granting 
a bounty on tar, pitch, and turpentine, and the act 5 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXIV, 78, 217, 259-260, 262-263, 425- 
426, 429, 439-440. 

2 Ibid., XXV, 459, 462. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 321 

George II, chapter 8, for encouraging Sir Thomas 
Lombe by paying him fourteen thousand pounds ster- 
ling. Among the colonial precedents were a bill for 
appointing Mr. Fury agent of the province in Great 
Britain, 1747, and another for appointing Mr. Crokatt 
agent in 1749. The potash bill was no more a money 
bill than either of these, and yet the council had amended 
both of them without complaint.^ The dispute was now 
brought to a close by the dropping of the bill, on the 
ground that the expense of the province in defending 
its frontiers was too great to make the appropriation.^ 

Although the council could neither initiate nor amend 
a money bill, the assembly apparently never denied 
them the right to reject a measure as a whole. It was 
a right which they frequently exercised. As they were 
quick to see and zealous to oppose any infringement 
upon the royal prerogative, it was rarely necessary for 
the governor to interpose his veto power. The only 
instance which I can find of the veto of a tax bill oc- 
curred in 1753. Governor Glen rejected the bill for the 
fiscal year 1752-1753, because it required the collectors 
of the tax to receive English and Spanish coins in 
payment at certain rates. He showed that this was 
inconsistent with the j^roclamation statute of the 6th 
of Anne. A midsummer session of the general assem- 
bly was called, and a new bill, without the objectionable 
clause, was passed and ratified on August 25.^^ 

The manner in which the assembly took advantage 
of their control over money bills to retain Mr. Crokatt 

^Com, House Journnls, Ms., XXV, 547-54!). 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXIV, 264-265. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVIII, 569, 571-574, 593, 610. 

21 



322 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

as colonial agent against the will of both governor and 
council has already been discussed." This dispute, 
which lasted from July, 1753, to March, 1756, was the 
most serious that had occurred between the two houses 
since President Middleton 's administration. During 
the course of it the commons adopted a resolution on 
March 21, 1755, that no account, petitions, or any other 
paper relating to a claim for public services should be 
sent to the council for their inspection,^ 

This resolution, which was made a standing rule of 
the house, was destined to give trouble after the agency 
dispute was settled. When the tax bill for 1756 came 
up for its second reading in the council on April 1, they 
asked the lower house to send up the accounts and 
vouchers upon which the estimate was based. A reso- 
lution to comply with the request was defeated, and 
attention was called to the resolution of March 21.^ 
The council refused to proceed with the bill until they 
could see the vouchers. The assembly were equally 
stubborn. They informed Governor Glen that it would 
be useless for them to sit longer and asked leave to 
adjourn for a time. Another message, dated two 
days later, maintained that the council had no right 
to see the vouchers and accounts, even granting that 
they were an upper house, which could reasonably be 
denied until they were so constituted by act of parlia- 
ment. Then they touched the governor on his most 
sensitive spot by taunting him with not presiding over 

'See Chapter IV, Colonial Agents, 165-168. 
2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXX, 408-411. 
Ubid., XXXI, 166-167. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 323 

the council when it presumed to sit as a legislative 
body. In conclusion, they agreed to send up the 
desired jDapers, if any precedent could be found in the 
English parliament since 1688.^ 

Glen replied by sending them his thirteenth instruc- 
tion, which, like Nicholson's thirty-fifth, gave the 
council the same rights as the commons in regard to 
money bills. He stated, however, that he did not contend 
that the council had any right to see the vouchers and 
accounts. He only hoped that the house would send 
them up and break the deadlock, as it was only a 
trivial matter after all. Speaking of his relations to 
the council, he declared that he had the right under the 
constitution to be present at all their meetings whether 
executive or legislative, and that he had exercised that 
right whenever he found it necessary for the king's 
service.^ 

As the council still retained the tax bill, an humble 
remonstrance was drawn up by the assembly and pre- 
sented to Governor Glen on the 29th. The prepara- 
tion of this document was an excellent bit of diplomacy. 
They flattered Glen with the assurance that no one in 
the province knew the British constitution better than 
he. To him, then, they appealed. If he thought that 
they had assumed any powers not exercised by the 
House of Commons in England, they begged that he 
would dissolve them. On the other hand, if the 
council had brought all the evils upon the province, 
they hoped that he would suspend those who had been 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, 183, 18G. 
nbid., 189-191. 



324 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the occasion thereof and appoint other men who had 
the service of His Majesty and the welfare of the 
province more at heart. A day later, they resolved 
not to proceed upon any business whatsoever until the 
council made reparation for the injury done them in 
withholding the tax bill/ 

Still smarting under his exclusion form the legisla- 
tive council and captured by the flattery of the lower 
house, Glen called the assembly before him and made 
a long speech, in which he sided with them and cen- 
sured the council. The behavior of the assembly was 
praiseworthy, as they had always voted ample supplies 
to His Majesty. The council were in the wrong in 
rejecting the tax bill of the previous year and in with- 
holding the present bill. They should have waived 
their privileges and passed the act without seeing any 
accounts or vouchers, because of the necessity of pro- 
curing funds to complete the fortifications at Charles- 
ton and to erect a fort among the Cherokees. On the 
other hand, he must assert the council's right to reject 
bills, though if any of them wantonly exercised that 
right he would suspend them. He did not think that 
there were sufficient grounds for doing so now.^ 

The lower house still refused to proceed on any 
business until the council made amends. On their 
request, His Excellency permitted an adjournment 
from May 4 until the second Tuesday in October. Be- 
fore that day came. Governor Glen's long administra- 
tion was closed by the arrival in the province of his 
successor, William Henry Lyttleton, 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, 199-202, 205. 

2 Ibid., 205-208. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 325 

Lyttleton reached Charleston, June 1, 1756, and was 
received with the usual pomp. A proclamation was 
issued to continue all officials in office and the general 
assembly was called together on the 17th.^ A tax bill 
was at once passed, but when it came up for a second 
reading in the council they demanded to see the ac- 
counts and vouchers. The assembly replied that to 
send them up would be contrary to a standing order of 
their house from which they could not recede. A dead- 
lock was again threatened, when the council, acting 
under the advice of Lyttleton, gave up their contention 
and passed the bill. They sent down a separate sched- 
ule of amendments, however, which the lower house 
refused to read. The council had made up their mind 
to yield, so they passed the measure on its final read- 
ing, July 2.2 The representatives of the people thus 
won another victory. 

This controversy gave rise to considerable theorizing 
on the subject of political philosophy, not only in the 
messages of the houses, but also in the public prints. 
In the Gazette for May 13 there was an article signed 

T s W 1, which questioned the right of the 

council to sit as an upper house.^ In the very nature 
of things, he declared, the same body could not be both 
an upper house of the legislature and an advisory coun- 
cil. After they had passed upon a measure as a branch 

1 Council Journals, Ms., XXV, 259-273. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXI, 220-221, 223-224, 230; Public 
Records Ms., XXVII, 124-125. 

3 8. Car. Gazette, No. 1142, May 13, 1756. McCrady states that this 
was probably written by Thomas Wright, son of the former chief justice, 
8. Car. under Royal Govt., 285. 



326 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of the legislature, what necessity would there be for 
the governor to ask their advice as a council? They 
affected to resemble the House of Lords in England, 
though there was a vast difference in their positions. 
The Lords of Parliament were summoned by writ and 
had no vote in electing members of the commons. They 
were the hereditary councilors of the king and could 
not be displaced at the pleasure of a minister. The 
members of the council in South Carolina were depend- 
ent and held their places during pleasure. They voted 
for members of the assembly and thus had their repre- 
sentatives. "Can they represent themselves and be 
represented? It appears to me very odd that any set 
of men can be so deluded as to imagine that one day 
they can be freemen, voting for representatives; the 
next day representing themselves as peers; and the 
third day metamorphosed into a council of state to 
approve or disapprove of what they had determined 
the morning or day before as an upper house. ' ' 

An upper house, he continued, could not be created 
by the king's instructions, but only by act of parlia- 
ment or by act of the provincial assembly. Beginning 
with this attack on the royal instructions, he went on 
to declare that they were binding only on the governor 
and council, for they alone could be removed for dis- 
obedience. They could not be binding on the people, 
for, if they were, all laws might be made and all taxes 
levied by instructions, and there would be no need for 
assemblies. Certainly, many of the instructions had 
never been executed, merely because the people had 
not thought proper to pass laws for that purpose. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 327 

Even if the council were admitted to be an upper 
house, they could have no right to meddle in money 
matters, as would appear from precedents in the House 
of Commons. It was foolish for them to demand to 
see the accounts when they had no power to lessen or 
augment a single item in the estim^ate. In concluding, 
he defied the council to show any authority from the 
king to act as an upper house. 

Governor Lyttleton's administration extended from 
June, 1756, to April, 1760. During these years of war- 
fare, a spirit of harmony pervaded the government. 
The journals are filled with accounts of Indian affairs 
and of discussions in regard to the ways and means of 
aiding the northern colonies. An incident which hap- 
pened just after L}i;t]eton's departure will serve to 
show how completely the assembly had gained control 
over money bills. On the third reading of the tax bill, 
July 18, 1760, one small amendment was suggested by 
the council. The lower house refused to read the bill, 
but returned it at once with a verbal message to the 
effect that they looked upon the conduct of the council 
in proposing an amendment to a money bill as a viola- 
tion of their privileges and calculated to destroy the 
harmony that should prevail between council and as- 
sembly. In reply, the council maintained their right to 
amend, but said that, out of regard for the public wel- 
fare, they would waive their rights and pass the bill as 
it was.^ 

We are ready now to summarize the struggle over 
revenue measures and consider its influence upon the 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIII, 342, 360. 



328 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A KOYAL PEOVINCE 

constitutional history of South Carolina before 1760. 
When the royal government went into operation in 1721 
the council and assembly had practically an equal con- 
trol over money bills. All public accounts were passed 
upon by a joint committee from the two houses, and the 
council frequently exercised the right of amendment. 
The first ten years of the royal period were taken up 
with the efforts of the planters to increase the amount 
of irredeemable paper currency. The assembly, repre- 
senting the planter interest, was brought into conflict 
with a council composed largely of merchants. The 
result was the development of a bitterness between the 
houses which time could not eradicate. 

As early as 1725 the assembly asserted that they pos- 
sessed all the powers and privileges of the British 
House of Commons and denied the right of the council 
to amend money bills. The denial was put in still 
stronger language in the Pinckney resolutions of 1735. 
In 1737 the assembly made two distinct encroachments : 
they refused to permit the council to examine public 
accounts, and they appointed a committee of their house 
to sit with the governor and council during the recess 
of the legislature and join with them in signing war- 
rants on the public treasurer and regulating the details 
of an Indian campaign, a purely administrative func- 
tion. As the result of a dispute in 1739, the council 
were permitted to suggest amendments in a separate 
schedule. They were regularly disregarded, however, 
and finally, in 1748, the assembly denied them even this 
privilege.^ The long dispute over the continuation of 

1 The council continued the custom of sending down amendments, 
however, for several years, but they were always treated with contempt. 



FINANCIAL HISTORY 329 

Mr. Crokatt as agent resulted in the resolution of March 
21, 1755, that no account, petition, or any other paper 
relating to a claim for public services should be sent 
to the council for their inspection. 

During all these disputes the assembly were contin- 
ually using the control over money bills to extend their 
power in other directions. Thus they elected a public 
treasurer and an agent who were obnoxious to the gov- 
ernor and council, withheld the salaries of executive 
and judicial officials, and occasionall}^ appointed com- 
mittees to attend to purely executive business. 



CHAPTER VII 

The Downfall of Royal Government (1760-1776) 

The year 1760 marks the beginning of an epoch in 
the history of Great Britain and her colonies. The 
accession of George III and the downfall of French 
rule in America are important events in the constitu- 
tional development of South Carolina. Before that 
date the struggle between the popular and prerogative 
elements was local in character. It was primarily a 
conflict between two parties within the province itself. 
The conservatives, representing the merchants and 
traders of Charleston, controlled the council. Not 
being dependent upon the assembly for a living,^ they 
were even more zealous than the governor to defend the 
interests of the crown. They failed because they were 
far less numerous than the planter faction and because 
the home government did not afford them the proper 
degree of sympathy and support. 

Shortly after 1760, an entire change came about. The 
victories over France in India and America resulted 
in the growth of a strong sentiment of imperialism in 
Great Britain. Coincident with this was the accession 
of a sovereign who was determined to uphold the royal 
prerogative throughout the limits of the British 
dominions. The American colonists soon felt the 

J The members of neither house received pay for their services. 

330 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 331 

effects of the change. The colonial administrative 
system was strengthened, and schemes were proposed 
for an imperial army and an imperial system of taxa- 
tion. The Americans might naturally have expected 
some sympathy from England, for they and the masses 
of the English people stood for exactly the same prin- 
ciple, the principle of popular government. But the 
English common people were not sufficiently well repre- 
sented in parliament to make themselves felt, and if 
they had been, they were too thoroughly saturated with 
imperialism to sympathize with the colonists. 

The time selected for putting the new system of 
imperial control into operation was not propitious. 
The withdrawal of the French from Canada and 
Louisiana and of the Spanish from Florida, by remov- 
ing a constant source of danger, necessarily made the 
Americans less dependent on the mother country. Not 
only this, but the several intercolonial wars had brought 
the colonists into closer relations with one another and 
taught them the advantages of union. 

Another mistake which the British government made 
in South Carolina was their failure to give due en- 
couragement to the loyal party within the colony. A 
native could scarcely hope to be governor or chief 
justice of the province. The council was so degraded 
by the appointment of English office-holders that the 
South Carolina gentleman scorned to accept a position 
which he would once have sought with eagerness. This 
shortsighted policy of the home government accounts 
largely for the weakness of the loyalists. It affected 
more particularly the wealthiest and most influential 



332 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A EOYAL PEOVINCE 

mercliants and importers, the men who would naturally 
liave led the prerogative party. Many others were in- 
fluenced by commercial boycotts and the use of physical 
force by the patriots. 

In previous chapters the attempt has been made to 
trace the encroachment of the popular upon the pre- 
rogative element in the government. By 1760 the 
share of the council in legislation had become very 
small. They rarely initiated or amended a bill of any 
kind, never a revenue measure. The annual estimate 
of expenses was made up entirely by the assembly, 
no vouchers, bills, or other public claims being sub- 
mitted to the council at all. At times, an appropriation 
would be made without stating for what particular ser- 
vice. The council could not strike out the item and 
could not ask why it was inserted. Their only remedy 
was to reject the entire bill. If they did this, the place- 
men among them would suffer from the delay in the 
payment of their salaries and fees, the merchants from 
the injury to the public credit. Occasionally a meas- 
ure of general legislation would be rejected, but the 
assembly could usually force the council to terms by 
withholding the tax bill. 

Public officials chosen nominally by the general 
assembly were, as a matter of fact, merely the nominees 
of the lower house. This is shown conclusively by the 
election of Public Treasurer Motte in 1743 and by the 
continued employment of Mr. Crokatt as agent after 
1753. The first of these victories made it possible, a 
few years later, for the assembly to order money paid 
out of the treasury without the consent of the governor 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVEKNMENT 333 

and council; the second enabled tliem to represent their 
conduct to the home government in the most favorable 
light. 

The encroachments on the judiciary were less pro- 
nounced. According to the theory held by the British 
ministry, the establishment of courts of justice was 
distinctly a prerogative of the crown. Still it was 
necessary to have the co-operation of the colonial legis- 
lature. Thus, in 1732, the attempt to create a court of 
exchequer was frustrated by the refusal of the assembly 
to pass a jury law. 

It is essential to an indei:)endent judiciary that the 
judge should be assured that he will not be removed 
nor his salary reduced or withheld for his official acts. 
In those countries in which the distinction between state 
and government is fully worked out these questions are 
settled by a written constitution. In the absence of 
such a document the judges are dependent ultimately 
upon either the executive or the legislature. The 
struggle between king and parliament for the control 
of the judiciary is one of the chief features of English 
history in the seventeenth century. The solution 
reached in the Act of Settlement was not extended to 
the colonies, so the conflict continued there until the 
downfall of British rule. In South Carolina the 
greater part of the judicial business was in the hands 
of the chief justice until 1766. The crown appointed 
and removed him at will. After 1760, he was almost 
invariably a needy placeman sent out from England. 
The attempts of the assembly to extend their influence 
along the other line suggested was in the end equally 



334 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

futile. At the beginning of the royal period, the chief 
justice, like the governor, was paid out of the colonial 
treasury. The assembly, as we have seen, withheld 
Judge Wright's salary for several years and finally 
allowed him only a part of what was due. As a re- 
sult, the home government, in 1735, fixed upon him a 
permanent salary payable out of the quit rents. The 
higher judiciary thus became entirely free from popular 
control. The unsuccessful attempt made in the circuit 
court acts of 1768 and 1769 to secure an independent 
judiciary has been discussed. Not only did the judges 
still hold at the pleasure of the crown, but the colony 
had to settle permanent salaries upon them.^ 

The weakness of the executive is well portrayed in 
the correspondence of Governor Glen with the home 
government. In a letter to the Duke of Bedford, dated 
October 10, 1748, he said that the province would be 
more prosperous if its constitution were newly mod- 
elled or newly promulgated, "for by a long loose ad- 
ministration it seems to be quite forgotten, and the 
whole frame of government unliinged, the political bal- 
ance in which consists the Strength and Beauty of the 
British Constitution being here entirely overturned, and 
all the Weights that should trim and poise it, being 
by different laws thrown into the Scale of the People. ' ' 
He then went on to give a few instances. Almost all 
places of honor or profit in the province were disposed 
of by the general assembly, which, in practice, meant 
the lower house. Thus they appointed the treasurer, 
the commissary, the Indian commissioner, the controller 

1 See Chapter III, The Judiciary. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 335 

of the duties, the powder receiver, and various other 
executive officials. 

"I must further observe to Your Grace that much of the 
executive part of Goverument and of the Administration is 
by various laws lodged in different sets of Commissioners, 
thus we have Commissioners of the Market, of the Work- 
house, of the Pilots, of the Fortifications, and so on without 
number. Nor have they stopped at Civil Posts only, but all 
Ecclesiastical Preferments are in the disposal or election of 
the People, though by the King's Instructions to his Gover- 
nor the Power of collating to all Livings of which His Majesty 
is Patron, is vested in him." 

All of these officers and most of the commissioners 
were named by the general assembly and were account- 
able to them only. ' ' Let their neglects or mismanage- 
ments be ever so flagrant, a governor has no power 
either to reprove or remove them. Thus little by little 
the people have got the whole administration in their 
hands." 

This state of affairs, he continued, had been brought 
about largely by the mistakes of former governors. 
For example, a message from one of his predecessors 
read: "Myself and His Majesty's Council are informed 
that Fort Johnson is in a ruinous condition, we there- 
fore desire that you may give directions to repair it." 
This was not a request for the means to carry on the 
work, but an invitation to the house to take charge of 
the administrative details. 

He was of opinion that many of these evils might be 
corrected if the councilors would only support the gov- 
ernor and attend council more regularly. Instead of 
being a source of strength, they had really weakened 



336 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

his position in excluding him from participation in their 
legislative business and in tiying to create a collegiate 
executive by interpreting the phrase governor in council 
to mean governor and council} 

In another letter, the governor gave a specific ex- 
ample to illustrate the weakness of his position. He 
discovered that one of the Indian traders was furnish- 
ing the captain of the French fort at the Alabamas with 
supplies, which he in turn utilized to further French 
interests among the Indians. Such conduct was very- 
detrimental to the public welfare and should have been 
severely punished. Glen contented himself, however, 
with merely requesting the commissioner for Indian 
trade not to renew the man's license. Receiving an 
evasive answer, he wrote a formal letter to the commis- 
sioner prohibiting him in His Majesty's name from 
granting the license. Nevertheless, the license was 
issued and the governor was powerless to prevent it.^ 

Such in brief was the political condition of South 
Carolina when the British government began to 
strengthen its system of imperial control. For the first 
few years after the province was settled in 1670 all 
powers, legislative, executive, and judicial were vested 
in the governor and council. Since then the assembly 
had gradually made encroachments until it had become 
practically the sovereign power. The demands of the 
British government after 1760 were not especially un- 
reasonable or tyrannical, but they were made upon a 
people who had too long been accustomed to having 
their own way. 

1 Puhlic Records, Ms., XXIII, 232-245. 
Ubid., 218-220. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 337 

A letter from the Board of Trade, dated November 
14, 1759, notified Governor Lyttleton of his transfer to 
the Jamaica government and of Thomas Pownall's ap- 
pointment to succeed him in Carolina. William Bull, 
who had been commissioned lieutenant-governor, was 
to administer the government until Pownall arrived.^ 
Bull, who was son of the former lieutenant-governor, 
had for many years been speaker of the assembly and, 
since 1749, a member of His Majesty's council. Dur- 
ing the remaining sixteen years of the royal period, he 
was called upon five different times to assume the bur- 
dens of government, and altogether presided over the 
province for more than eight years. He was a man of 
great tact and ability and was thoroughly respected by 
all. Born and reared in the province, he understood 
and appreciated the prejudices of the people, but was 
at the same time intensely loyal to the mother country. 
McCrady is of the opinion that South Carolina would 
not have joined the other colonies in the Revolution, 
had the British ministry adopted the principle of home 
rule, given Bull a full governor's commission, and 
filled the places of honor and trust with the educated 
young men of the province instead of with needy place- 
men and strangers from England.- 

Pownall decided not to come out to the province, and 
Thomas Boone, governor of New Jersey, was trans- 
ferred to South Carolina. Bull's first administration 
began with Lyttleton 's departure in April, 1760, and 
continued until Boone's arrival in December of the fol- 

1 Puhlic Records, Ms., XXVIII, 268-269. 

2 8. Car. under Royal Govt., 795-796. 
22 



338 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

lowing year.^ Most of this period was taken up with 
providing for expeditions against the Cherokees, led 
by Colonels Montgomery and Grant.^ A new assembly, 
called to meet October 6, 1760, was dissolved by the 
death of George II, and another met March 26, 1761. 
Benjamin Smith was again elected speaker.' 

In the summer of 1761 the old dispute over money 
bills was renewed. The council sent down a bill, on 
June 13, for laying an additional dutj^ on negroes, which 
they had amended in some minor details. The assembly 
at once replied that this was a money bill and the coun- 
cil had no right to amend it. Because of the necessity 
for securing a war revenue, however, they had simply 
struck out the amendments and repassed the measure. 
The council were warned that if they ever attempted 
to amend a money bill again the assembly would refuse 
to proceed on any business until satisfaction was made 
them. The council now rejected the measure and in- 
formed the house that they had the right to amend any 
and all money bills, and proposed to exercise the right 
whenever they saw fit. The only response to this was 
a resolution of the assembly not to proceed on any 
further business with the council during that session. 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull interfered at this juncture 
and prorogued them for a few days to allow their wrath 
to abate.* 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXIX, 54-55, 210. 

2 For accounts of these expeditions, see Hewatt, His. of S. Car., Chap. 
X, McCrady, 8. Car., under Royal Govt., Chap. XIX. 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIII, Part II, 4, 5, XXXIV, 2, 3. 
*Ihid., XXXIV, 152-153, 194, 197. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVERNMENT 339 

On re-assembling, the lower house passed another 
duty bill, which was likewise rejected by the council. 
The assembly now adopted a device occasionally used 
by the English House of Commons. A bill to continue 
the South Carolina regiment in service was passed with 
a rider attached containing the provisions of the duty 
act. At the request of Lieutenant-Governor Bull, the 
council passed the measure on its second reading and 
sent down a schedule of two amendments, one of which 
provided for a change in the title to show that a duty 
was imposed on imported negroes. As the assembly re- 
fused to adopt the amendment, the bill was rejected by 
the council on its third reading. In a long message to 
the lieutenant-governor, the lower house declared that 
they had done all they could to provide for the regi- 
ment, but that all their etforts had been frustrated by 
a council which at no time during the session had over 
five members present. The houses were now adjourned 
until autumn.^ 

Governor Boone arrived in the province December 
22, 1761." On the 26th, he dissolved the assembly 
because they had been elected under the election law 
of April, 1759, since repealed in England.^ Writs 
were at once issued for a new assembly to meet on 
February 6, 1762. Benjamin Smith was again chosen 
speaker without opposition.* The first session came 
to an end by prorogation on May 29. On the last day of 

J Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIII, 220, 222, 224, 228, 230-235. 

2 Public Records, Extra, Ms., Ill, 437. 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIV, 274-275. 

* Ibid., XXXV, Part I, 3. 



340 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

the session, a committee was appointed by the lower 
house to sit with the governor and council during the 
recess for the purpose of distributing presents among 
the Indians. Governor Boone assured them that he 
could look ujDon such a committee only as private 
gentlemen and would not consult them in regard to 
executive business/ 

The second session of Boone's first general assembly 
continued from June 29 to July 9. Leave was then 
asked to adjourn for a time. His Excellency informed 
them that it would be more conformable to the best 
examples for him to prorogue them. Accordingly, 
they were prorogued, first to August 9, and later to 
September 9.^ 

The last session of this assembly continued only five 
days, but during that time there began the most serious 
dispute that had yet arisen between the representatives 
of the people and the servants of the crown. On March 
19, 1762, Governor Boone sent a message to the assem- 
bly complaining of the election act of 1721 on the 
ground that it was too loose and general and too little 
obligatory on the church wardens. They replied very 
briefly that they had never known or heard of any bad 
consequences arising from the said law and could see 
no necessity for altering it.^ 

If Boone had possessed any wisdom or tact, he would 
have dropped the question at once. Instead of doing 
so, however, he proceeded to wait for a concrete instance 

iCow. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 135, 137. 
Ubid., 145, 152-153. 
' Ibid., 41, 49. 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 341 

to demonstrate his charges, or rather, being an obstinate 
prerogative official of the Edward Randolph type, for 
an opportunity to show his power. His patience was 
soon rewarded. The law provided that the church 
wardens, after receiving the writs, should take oath 
before a magistrate to perform their duties, give proper 
notice, hold the election, and then make written returns 
of the results on the writs. Some special elections to 
fill vacancies were held during the recess from July 9 
to September 9. In looking over the results it was 
found that the writ for the parish of St. Paul's was 
blank. On September 13 the assembly resolved that 
the writ should be given back to the church wardens to 
make a return. While the question was under dis- 
cussion, a message was received from the governor stat- 
ing that he was in the council chamber ready to receive 
the assembly for the purpose of ratifying a certain bill 
that was before him. Mr. Lowndes and Mr, Pinckney 
were sent up to inform His Excellency that the house 
was in a debate and desired his indulgence for a short 
time. A further investigation showed still another de- 
fect in the election. The church wardens had not 
taken the necessary oaths before a justice of the peace 
before opening the polls. The house decided, how- 
ever, to overlook this flaw and recognize the validity 
of the election.^ 

The return, as finally made out by the wardens, 
showed that Christopher Gadsden had been elected. 
The ordinary oath as a member of the assembly was 
taken, and then Mr. Bee and Mr. Sommers accompanied 

HJom. House Jonrniih, Ms., XXXV, 154, 156-157. 



342 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

him into the jDresence of the governor to see the state 
oaths administered. They soon returned with the an- 
nouncement that His Excellency desired the immediate 
attendance of the house in the council chamber, where 
he would assign reasons for refusing to qualify Gadsden. 
They went up at once and were entertained by the gov- 
ernor with a very haughty speech. On receiving their 
request for an extension of time before coming to the 
council chamber, he had consulted their journals to see 
what particular business they were engaged in. He 
was astonished, he declared, to find that they were en- 
deavoring to dispense with an act of the assembly to 
which they owed their very existence as a legislative 
body. The writ, as first presented to himself and coun- 
cil, contained no return at all, and, in addition to this, 
the church wardens confessed that they had not been 
sworn according to law. His conclusion would have 
done justice to a Stuart monarch: ''To manifest in as 
public a manner as I can my disavowal of so undeniable 
an infraction of the Election Act, I do hereby dissolve 
this present General Assembly and it is dissolved ac- 
cordingly."^ 

Writs were at once issued for the election of a new 
assembly to meet on the 25th of October. Gadsden, 
Lowndes, Bee, and in fact nearly all of the members 
of the previous house were returned. Benjamin Smith 
was again the choice for speaker. The state oaths 
were duly administered to the members, Gadsden among 
the rest. On the 26th, the assembly was prorogued to 
November 22.^ 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, 158-159. 

2 Ibid., XXXV, Part II, 1-3. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 343 

Governor Boone tried in vain to distract the atten- 
tion of the assembly from their grievances with eloquent 
descriptions of the British victories in Canada, On No- 
vember 24, Messrs. Rutledge, Lowndes, Manigault, 
Gadsden, Pinckney, Scott, Wragg, Ferguson, and Doc- 
tor Oliphant were appointed a committee on privileges 
and elections, and ordered to consider the proceedings 
of September 13 in connection with the liberties and 
privileges of the house to determine their own elections. ^ 

On November 30, Mr. John Rutledge, chairman of 
the committee, presented a long report, together with 
a series of resolutions. The report argued that the 
election law did not require the wardens to take a spe- 
cial oath before each election, and maintained that 
Gadsden's election was regular and valid. Taking up. 
Boone's statement that the assembly owed its existence 
to the said election act, they declared that the right 
of the people to be represented in the legislature was 
not founded upon any statute, but was derived from 
the known and ancient constitution of the mother 
country. The resolutions declared that the commons 
house of assembly were the sole judges of the election 
of their members, that the governor could not consti- 
tutionally take notice of anything said or done in the 
assembly until it came before him in the regular man- 
ner, that his refusal to administer the oaths to Gadsden 
was a breach of the privileges of the house, and finally 
that the dissolution of the late assembly for matters 
cognizable only by them was a violation of the freedom 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, Part II, 12. 



344 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

of elections and tended to destroy the liberties of the 
people.^ 

The report and resolutions were adopted and sent to 
the governor. In his reply Boone strove in vain to 
keep down his anger and speak in terms of politeness. 
He maintained that the election act very plainly re- 
quired the wardens to take a special oath before each 
election and said that the general oath of office was 
not sufficient. He denied that the assembly had an in- 
herent right to examine and finally determine an elec- 
tion in violation of the law. No branch of the legisla- 
ture, he declared, had any power to dispense with a 
law of the land. Taking up the resolution about dis- 
solving the assembly, he informed them that he would 
exercise the power of dissolution whenever he saw fit, 
whether his reasons were satisfactory to the assembly 
or not.2 

A message in answer to this was prepared by Gads- 
den himself as a member of the committee on privileges 
and elections. The election was discussed in detail, and 
a strong effort was made to show that it was both regu- 
lar and legal. The original return had been made on a 
separate slip of paper instead of on the writ itself. 
One of the wardens twice asked the council clerk for 
the writ in order to make the proper return, but he 
said that the separate return would be sufficient. The 
message then went on to assert that the right of repre- 
sentation did not rest upon the election act, but was a 
part of the British constitution. Repeal all the elec- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, Part II, 18-20, 26-28. 
^Ibid., 35-37. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVEKNMENT 345 

tion laws that had ever been passed and there would 
still remain the charter from Charles II, which guaran- 
teed a share in the government to the freemen. But 
the charter itself did not confer a privilege; it simply 
confirmed the natural right of the freemen to be repre- 
sented/ 

Boone retorted that they might send him forty such 
messages if they wished, but he could assure them that 
they would have no effect. On December 16, the as- 
sembly resolved by a vote of twenty-four to six that 
they would enter on no further business until the gov- 
ernor did justice to them. The committee of corre- 
spondence was ordered to draw up a full account of the 
dispute and transmit the same along with the proper 
vouchers to the agent in Great Britain.^ 

On the 28th, Governor Boone adjourned the assembly 
to January 24, 1763. A quorum for business did not 
appear and the few members present adjourned from 
day to day until March 24. Four days later the gov- 
ernor again adjourned them to April 6. The same 
performance was repeated and it was not until Sep- 
tember 2 that a quorum was secured. Benjamin 
Smith having left the province, the Honorable Rawlins 
Lowndes was unanimously chosen speaker.' 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXV, Part II, 38-45. This is one of the 
very few instances during the royal period in which an appeal was made 
to the charter. Here it was only to confirm what was called a natural 
and inherent right. That it should be referred to at all is good evi- 
dence that the colonies were drawing together and that the influence of 
New England was making itself felt. The charter had in reality been 
suspended by act of parliament in 1729. 

2/6td., 46, 48-49. There is a printed pamphlet in the library of the 
New York Historical Society which contains all of these papers. 

3 Ibid., XXXVI, 1-13. 



346 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

The old dispute was soon renewed. At a special 
election, Sir John Colleton was returned as a member 
for the parish of St. John's, Berkeley county. On Sep- 
tember 5, the assembly ordered Mr. Gadsden and Mr. 
Moultrie to attend Sir John and see him take the state 
oaths before the governor. Boone was not in the 
council chamber at the time, and they went to his resi- 
dence. He promptly ordered Gadsden and Moultrie 
out of the house, but requested Sir John to stay and 
receive the oaths.^ 

The news of this insult was not calculated to im- 
prove the temper of the assembly. A message from 
the governor urging the immediate passage of a tax 
bill was laid on the table, and the house busied itself 
with a committee report on a petition to the king for 
Boone's removal. The feeling was still further inten- 
sified, on September 12, by Boone's refusal to admin- 
ister the state oaths to several members, for the alleged 
reason that he wished first to look over the assembly 
journals and see that they had qualified as members. 
The assembly resolved that this was a new insult and 
breach of privilege. ^ 

The members, for the most part, now retired to their 
several homes, and the meetings of the assembly came 
to an end. An incursion of the Creek Indians into 
the northwestern settlements resulted in a short session 
early in January. A motion to discharge the resolu- 
tion of December 16, 1762, to do no further business 

iCoHi. Hotise Journals, Ms., XXXVI, 17-18. 
Ubid., 28-29. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 347 

failed to carry.^ Most of the members now absented 
themselves from the house, and public affairs were neg- 
lected until after the departure of Governor Boone for 
England, on May 11, 1764.2 

The troubles of the province did not yet cease en- 
tirely. Lieutenant-Governor Bull again took charge 
of the government and issued a proclamation for the 
general assembly to convene on May 22. One of the 
first questions to come up was in regard to a tax bill 
for the years 1762 and 1763. In the original estimate, 
the sum of seven thousand pounds currency was in- 
serted for Governor Boone, but the item was struck out 
by the assembly on the third reading. The council 
remonstrated and finally rejected the entire bill. Mr. 
Gadsden, from the committee appointed to consider the 
matter, declared that the bill's rejection must give a 
great shock to the public credit, putting it on a "most 
disadvantageous and scandalous footing, because the 
Suppliers of the Public must thence clearly perceive 
that their hopes of payment do not so much depend 
on the Faith and Honor of their natural Representa- 
tives as upon the Caprice and Pleasure of the Council, 
and very often even of a majority of such as are alto- 
gether placemen, and have no Natural Tie or Connec- 
tion whatever with the Province. ' ' ^ 

The general assembly was prorogued from August 
25 to September 18. On re-assembling, the council gave 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVI, Part II, 5-G. 

'^Public Records, Ms., XXX, 143. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVI, Part II, 236, 244, 250-251. 
Many such references might be cited to show the decline in the in- 
liuence of the council. 



348 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

up their contention and the supply hill was passed 
without any provision being made for the governor.^ 
Meanwhile, the whole affair had been laid before the 
home government. Two questions had to be consid- 
ered, one in regard to the governor's salary and the 
other in regard to the method of administering the 
state oaths. The first was settled by an additional 
instruction to Lord Charles Greville Montagu, Boone's 
successor as governor. He was to recommend to the 
assembly the necessity of providing for the arrears of 
Boone's salary during the two and a half years of his 
administration. Any delay in paying it would be a 
dangerous precedent, as it would prevent governors 
from faithfully executing their duties and make them 
dependent on the legislature." Montagu arrived in the 
province June 12, 1766,^ and, on the 17th sent this in- 
struction to the assembly. It was referred to a com- 
mittee, which made its report through Mr. Lynch on 
the 20th. The report declared that the house had 
done right in withholding the governor's salary, 
but that, out of regard for the instructions of His 
Majesty, who had been graciously pleased to remove 
Boone, they would vote him his allowance up to the 
time of his departure. Thus they would show to the 
world that they did not intend to oppose His Majesty 
or overawe his governor, but merely desired to protect 
their own rights and privileges. The assembly were 
so elated over the recent repeal of the Stamp Act that 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVI, Part II, 266-268. 
2 Public Records, Ms., XXXI, 30-31. 
s/feid., 72. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 349 

tliey adopted this report and provided for Boone in the 
tax bill.' 

The other i3roblem, in regard to the method of ad- 
ministering the state oaths, was solved by the Board of 
Trade. In a report of Jnly 16, 1764, they reprimanded 
Boone for presmning to be the sole judge of elections, 
and, to prevent such disputes for the future, recom- 
mended that instructions be sent to Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Bull authorizing him to appoint deputies to ad- 
minister the oaths. ^ The assembly, however, were very 
well satisfied with the existing arrangement so long as 
Bull was in the executive chair. Finally, on July 11, 
1769, they reminded Governor Montagu of the report 
and requested him to abide by it. He replied by send- 
ing down a commission to Peter Manigault, Kawlins 
Lowndes, James Parsons, Charles Pinckney, Benjamin 
Dart, and William Moultrie, all members of the com- 
mons house.' 

During the two years from Boone's departure in 
May, 1764, to Montagu's arrival in June, 1766, 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull was for the second time at 
the head of affairs. The principal event of the period 
was of course the struggle over the Stani]) Act. The 
act was passed early in 1765, but was not to go into 
effect until November 1. As soon as the news of its 
passage reached the colonies, there was great excitement 
and indignation. As might have been expected, the 
New England colonies took the lead in formulating 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, 160-161, 165-166, 194. 

^PuUic Records, Ms., XXX, 172-175. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 43, 51-52. 



350 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

measures of opposition. The Massachusetts House of 
Representatives proposed, June 6, that representatives 
from the lower houses of the various colonies should 
meet in New York on the first Tuesday in October/ The 
proposition came before the South Carolina assembly, 
July 19, and a committee was appointed to consider 
the matter. Chairman Gadsden reported on the 26th 
that the measure proposed was both prudent and neces- 
sary and recommended the appointment of a com- 
mittee to proceed to New York. The report was adopted 
by the house. A few days later, they resolved to defray 
the expenses of a committee of three, and ordered the 
public treasurer to advance to them a sum not exceeding 
six hundred pounds sterling. Thomas Lynch, Christ- 
opher Gadsden, and John Rutledge were appointed.^ 

The house adjourned on August 9 until September 
9, but, as their three years' term was about to expire, 
they were dissolved and a new assembly was called to 
meet on October 28. In addition to Pinckney, Rutledge, 
Laurens, Lowndes, Lynch, Gadsden, and others already 
mentioned, we find one new member who was to take 
a leading part in the subsequent history of the province. 
This was William Henry Drayton, elected from the 
parish of St. Andrew's. The Honorable Peter Mani- 
gault was unanimously chosen speaker.'^ 

1 Barry, Bist. of Mass., Second Period, 294-295. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, 89-90, 94, 97. The custom had 
gradually grown up for the treasurer to pay out money on the sole 
order of the lower house. This gave considerable trouble a few years 
later, as we shall see. 

3 Ibid., XXXVII, Part II, 1-4. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 351 

The delegates to the Stamp Act Congress returned 
to Charleston late in November, and, on the 26th, Gads- 
den presented their report to the assembly. The de- 
claration of rights, the petitions to the king and Com- 
mons, and the memorial to the Lords were all reported 
and entered in the journals.' Gadsden, Wright, 
Pinckney, Parsons, and Rutledge were appointed a 
committee to draw up suitable resolutions. On the 
29tli, they reported a series of eighteen resolutions, 
which were in practically the same language as the 
declarations of the Stamp Act Congress. After adopt- 
ing these, the house adjourned to January 7, 1766." 

As the day approached on which the law was to go 
into force, the popular leaders made every effort to 
arouse the people to opposition. A letter from Lieu- 
tenant-Governor Bull to the Board of Trade affords 
good evidence of the powerful influence of New Eng- 
land on the other colonies. He declared that the people 
were generally disposed to obey the law, ''but by the 
artifices of some busy spirits the minds of men here 
were so universally poisoned with the principles which 
were imbibed and propagated from Boston and Rhode 
Island (from which Towns, at this time of the year, 
vessels very frequently arrive) that after their ex- 
ample the People of this Town resolved to seize and 
destroy the Stamp Papers, and to take every means 
of deterring the Stamp Officers from performing their 
duty."' 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part II, 15-24. 

'Ibid., 26-29, 32. 

3 Letter from Lieutenant-Governor Bull to the Board of Trade, 
dated November 3, 1765. Public Records, Ms., XXX, 281-289. The 
following account is taken largely from this letter. 



352 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

When the ship bearing the stamped paper arrived 
in the harbor on October 18, a mob of excited men 
gathered with the intention of destroying the paper 
whenever an attempt was made to land it. Seeing the 
danger, Bull ordered it to be sent down to Fort 
Johnson, and reinforced the garrison there with a 
sergeant and twelve Eoyal American troops. When 
the mob found that the paper was out of their reach, 
they directed their fury against the stamp officers, Mr. 
George Saxby, inspector, and Mr. Caleb Lloyd, dis- 
tributor of stamps. Saxby had not yet returned from 
a visit to England, but his house was attacked and badly 
damaged. 

The commotion now subsided to some extent until 
the arrival of Saxby on the 27th. Hearing of the feel- 
ing against him, he prudently decided not to come up 
to Charleston, but to get off the boat at Fort Johnson, 
where Lloyd had also retired for safety. Two days 
later they both signed an agreement to suspend the 
duties of their offices until parliament could take action 
upon the united remonstrance of the colonies.^ 

Business soon came almost to a standstill. The law 
courts were closed, land grants could not be passed, 
ships remained in the harbor as if under an embargo, 
and no transaction requiring the use of stamps was 
carried on.^ Late in January, or early in February, of 
1766, Colonel Peter Randolph, surveyor-general of His 
Majesty's customs, arrived from Virginia. He said 
that he had advised the customs officers in his district 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXX, 279-280. 

2 Ibid., 299. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVERNMENT 353 

to clear vessels without the use of stamped paper when 
the stamp officials refused to act, and that this was the 
practice in all the colonies of his district to the north- 
ward. The people now began to murmur against the 
embargo, which they had borne with patience for thir- 
teen weeks. The harbor was filled with ships, which 
were allowed to come in, but not to depart. Various 
applications were made to Bull, both by the people and 
by the assembly, urging him to open the port. He 
finally agreed to issue certificates to ship captains stat- 
ing that the stamp officers refused to act and that no 
paper was to be had. A small sum was charged for 
this service, probably equivalent in value to the stamps 
which the law required to be affixed to the ordinary 
clearance. After this arrangement had been made, 
Colonel Randolph ordered the collector and naval officer 
to clear vessels as usual.' 

Popular clamor next demanded that the courts should 
be opened. When the Stamp Act went into effect, the 
common law courts consisted of Chief Justice Charles 
Skinner^ and an assistant justice, Mr. Robert Pringle, 
who rarely attended and never took any active part in 
the work of the court. Skinner expressed the opinion 
that no business could be done except upon stamped 
paper, and he adhered to it in spite of the appeals of 
the Charleston bar. The lawyers then requested Lieu- 
tenant-Governor Bull to appoint three new assistant 
judges. He agreed, and commissions were issued to 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXI, 22-25. See Wallace, Constitutional 
History of aS'. Car., 38-39. 

2 The name is usually so spelled in the public records and in the 
legislative journals, although the form Shinner is sometimes found. 

23 



354 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Eawlins Lowndes, on February 27, to Benjamin Smith, 
on February 28, and to Daniel Doyley, on March 1.' 
The chief justice lived some distance back in the coun- 
try, and these appointments were made without his 
knowledge. When the court met on March 3, he was 
much surprised at the presence of his new colleagues 
and perceived at once that they had been put on the 
bench for the purpose of overruling his decisions. 

The case of Jordan vs. Laiv came up and motion was 
made by Mr. Bee, attorney for the plaintiff, that judg- 
ment should be entered. Messrs. Manigault, Pinckney, 
Parsons and Rutledge argued in favor of the motion. 
Egerton Leigh, His Majesty's attorney-general, op- 
posed it on the ground that no stamped paper was to 
be had. A petition from some of the merchants, 
traders, and other inhabitants of the province urging 
the court to proceed without stamped paper was pre- 
sented by Mr. Parsons. The consideration of the whole 
matter was postponed until the next return day, which 
was April 1. Then the case again came up and the 
assistant judges expressed the unanimous opinion that 
judgment should be entered for the plaintiff in the 
usual manner, since stamped paper could not be ob- 
tained. The chief justice said in dissent "that the 
court ought not to open nor business to go on, until 
the act of Parliament imposing stamp duties in His 
Majesty's American Dominions could be complied 
with."" 

The plan to open the courts has thus about to suc- 
ceed, when it met with opposition from an unexpected 

1 Puhlic Records, Ms., XXXI, 09, 215-216. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 355 

quarter. Dougal Campbell, clerk of the court, refused 
to enter up the judgment, on the ground that the use 
of unstamped paper was contrary to law. The assist- 
ant justices appealed to Lieutenant-Governor Bull to 
suspend him for refusing to obey their orders. Their 
representation, together with a petition from Campbell, 
was laid before the council. Campbell maintained that, 
as the Stamp Act provided for heavy penalties in case 
of the disobedience of those who held offices similar to 
his own, he was bound to regard himself as an account- 
able agent and not a mere ministerial officer. Bull and 
the council decided that he was conscientious in his 
conduct and was not guilty of wanton disobedience or 
contempt. Accordingly, they refused to suspend him. 

This scheme having failed of its purpose, other sim- 
ilar expedients were tried, but all were foiled by the 
vigilance of Judge Skinner and Mr. Campbell. On 
May 3, a ship arrived from Barbadoes with unofficial 
news that the Stamp Act had been repealed. There 
was great rejoicing in Charleston, and the chief justice, 
very much against his will, was forced to participate 
in the revels. Lieutenant-Governor Bull at once 
opened the courts of chancery and ordinary, and clerk 
Campbell announced his readiness to proceed with un- 
stamped paper in the common law courts. Skinner, 
however, remained firm in his resolution to take no part 
in the work of the court until official information was 
received of the repeal of the law. He kept the court 
seal in his hands, but the assistant judges opened the 
courts and made use of Mr. Pringle's seal at arms. 

The judges now proceeded to take revenge on the 



356 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

clerk. He was severely reprimanded for refusing to 
enter the judgment in Jordan vs. Lair and was ordered 
to pay a fine of one hundred pounds proclamation money 
within ten days. Bull suspended the payment of the 
fine until His Majesty's pleasure could be signified. 
When the court met on May 29, Campbell's ardor for 
the royal prerogative had very much cooled, and he 
presented a petition setting forth his sorrow at having 
incurred the court's displeasure, and begging to have 
his fine remitted. They decided that his conduct had 
proceeded from an error of judgment rather than from 
contempt for the court, and the fine was reduced to 
ten pounds. 

Official information of the repeal of the Stamp Act 
was received on June 5. Judge Skinner at once an- 
nounced to the court, through the clerk, that he was 
ready to proceed to business. The assistant justices 
refused to allow his notice to be entered on the records.^ 

The sequel of this story is found in the suspension 
of Skinner from office in the following year. On April 
18, the assembly requested Governor Montagu to sus- 
pend him, at the same time sending up a long series 
of charges, the substance of which was ignorance of 
the law and general misconduct in office. The charges 
were sent to Skinner with the request that he should 
answer them as soon as convenient. A memorial in 

1 The foregoing account is based upon " An Account of the proceed- 
ings of the Chief Justice, Assistant Judges, and Lawyers of South 
Carolina on the Stamp Act," and other documents enclosed in a letter 
from Governor Montagu to tlie Board of Trade. Public Records, Ms., 
XXXI, 8G-230. 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 357 

reply was received from him on May 3. The council 
took his case under consideration and expressed the 
unanimous opinion that he was unacquainted with the 
law and unfit for the office of chief justice. Accord- 
ingly, on May 11, Governor Montagu suspended him 
until the king's pleasure could be known. Skinner 
seems to have been a rough uncouth sort of character, 
although his memorial and his report on the Stamp Act 
controversy show that he was a man of education, and, 
though not a lawyer, possessed of considerable legal 
knowledge.^ Possibly he was correct in his statement 
that the real reason for the attack upon him was because 
he did his duty in endeavoring to execute a law of par- 
liament. Speaking of the committee which made the 
charges, he declared that all of them were "furious 
Liberty Boys, three of them the very three who were 
appointed to meet the famous Congress at New York, 
the chairman one of these three." Gadsden was the 
chairman.- 

As we have already seen, the new governor. Lord 
Charles Greville Montagu, arrived in Charleston on 
June 12, 1766. The people were still rejoicing over the 
repeal of the Stamp Act, and the feeling of loyalty was 
strong. There were a few bold spirits, however, led by 
Christopher Gadsden and William Johnson, an intel- 
ligent artisan, who were not entirely satisfied. The 

1 McCrady is of the opinion that some one else prepared these papers 
for him. 8. Car. under Royal Govt., 467. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXXI, 326-392; Com. House JournaJs, Ms., 
XXXVII, 351-359, 391-392. The unanimous vote of the council in 
favor of suspension indicates that there was at least some foundation 
for the charires. 



358 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Declaratoiy Act meant more to them than the repeal 
of the Stamp Act. Their fears were realized when 
parliament passed a statute the next year for levying 
a duty on glass, red lead, white lead, painter's colors, 
tea, and paper imported into the province.' 

Montagu's first administration extended from 1766 
to 1769, with the exception of a few months in the sum- 
mer of 1768, which he spent in the northern colonies. 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull had charge of the govern- 
ment in his absence. During these three years there 
were two disputes with the assembly : one was over the 
furnishing of supplies to the British troops in Charles- 
ton; the second grew out of the efforts of the assembly 
to join other colonial assemblies in opposing the Town- 
shend Acts. 

In the summer of 1769, Governor Montagu received 
a formal letter from Major Chisolme, commanding the 
royal troops in Charleston, in which complaint was 
made of the scarcity of fuel and other barrack neces- 
saries. His Excellency laid this letter before the as- 
sembly, together with a message urging that the 
supplies be furnished. They wished to know whether 
the troops were to be used for garrison duty on the 
frontiers, as the independent companies and several 
detachments of royal troops had previously been em- 
ployed. In reply, the governor enclosed a copy of a 
letter which he had received from General Gage, 
dated New York, October 8, 1768. The letter stated 
that there would be a greater number of troops 
assembled at St. Augustine than could be lodged 

J Statutes at Large, 7 George III., chap. 46. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 359 

there during the winter, and asked the governor 
to provide accommodations at Charleston until spring 
for such as Brigadier-General Haldimand could 
not put under cover at St. Augustine. Accordingly, 
His Majesty's twenty-first regiment and one company 
of royal artillery had been lodged in the barracks at 
Charleston and were still there, though spring had come 

and gone.^ 

The assembly seems to have ignored the matter en- 
tirely, for, on July 27, Governor Montagu called atten- 
tion to his previous message on the subject and urged 
them to provide at once the needed supplies.' A com- 
mittee to whom the message was referred expressed 
the opinion that no provision should be made for the 
troops because they were not to be used to garrison the 
frontier, and because they should be supported out of 
the revenue raised in the colonies by act of Parliament 
for that purpose.' On September 6, the troops were 
embarked for St. Augustine.^ 

Just as in the Stamp Act controversy, the province 
of Massachusetts Bay led in the opposition to the Town- 
shend Acts. Their House of Representatives sent a 
circular letter, dated February 11, 1768, to the assem- 
blies of all the colonies. In this document they ac- 
knowledged the supreme legislative power of parlia- 
ment over the empire, but declared that they derived 
all their powers from the constitution and could not 

^Co7n. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 19-20, 22-23, 25-27; PuUic 
Records, Ms., XXXII, 100. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 84-85. 

3/fcirf., 1.36-137. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 101. 



360 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

overleap it without destroying their own foundation. 
They further pronounced it as -an essential unalterable 
Right m nature grafted into the British Constitution 
as a Fundamental Law, ever held sacred and irre- 
vocable by the subjects within the Realm, that what a 
man hath honestly acquired is absolutely his own, which 
he may freely give, but cannot be taken from him with- 
out his consent. ' ' The letter then went on to sav that 
the duty acts recently passed by parliament we^e for 
the express purpose of raising a revenue and hence 

J^Z.'^'IrT'T'" -^^ '^' ^"'"^'^^ ^^^ constitutional 
rights of the American subjects, who were not and 

could not be represented in parliament. Various other 
grievances were also enumerated: the king aDpointed 
colonial governors and fixed a stipend for^hfrn" 
out the consent of the people and at their expense- 
judges held commissions at the pleasure of the crown 
and were entirely independent of the people; complaint 
was made of the mutiny and desertion act and of the 
powers conferred upon the commissioners of the cus- 
toms m America.! 

On receipt of this letter, the Virginia House of Bur- 
gesses drew up appropriate resolutions, and, on May 
9, sen out a circular letter of similar import. Amono- 
other things, they declared that -no power on earth has 
a right to impose Taxes on the People, or to take the 
smallest portion of their Property without their Con- 
sent given by their Representatives in Parliament" 
In conclusion, the hope was expressed that a union of 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part III, 9-12. See Bancroft 
mst. of the United Slates, Edition 1878. IV, 73I74; FaUrejnZof 
New England, V, 378-379. ranrej, aist of 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 361 

all tlie colonies would again establish the constitution 
on genuine principles.^ 

Both of these letters were received by Speaker Mani- 
gault during a recess of the assembly. On July 10, 
he wrote a letter to the Honorable Thomas Gushing, 
speaker of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, 
informing him that South Carolina had already in- 
structed her agent in England to join with the agents 
of the other colonies in obtaining a repeal of the recent 
acts of parliament and to assist them in all matters 
where the general interests of ^America were concerned. 
The term of the present assembly was about to expire 
and they would soon be dissolved. Consequently, he 
would not have the opportunity of laying the Massa- 
chusetts letter before them.^ 

The assembly was dissolved on September 8 and writs 
were issued for a new election, returnable on October 
25. On the 24th, they were prorogued by Lieutenant- 
Governor Bull to November 15 in order to await the 
return of Lord Montagu, who was spending the summer 
in the northern colonies.'^ The governor arrived in 
Charleston on the 30th.* The assembly met on the day 
appointed, and the Honorable Peter Manigault was 
again unanimously chosen speaker.' This body, accord- 
ing to Bull, had so imbibed the political principles of 
Boston that it was filled with a ' ' kind of enthusiasm veiy 

1 Com. House JovrnaU, Ms., XXXVTI. Part III, 12-15. 

*Ibid., 15-16. 

3 Ibid., 1. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 60. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXII, Part III, 2-4. 



362 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

aijt to predominate in popular assemblies and whose 
loud cries silence the weaker voice of moderation. ' ' ^ 
Weekly advices from Boston kept them informed in 
regard to the Liberty fiasco, the anti-rescinding resolu- 
tions and other matters transpiring in New England. 
During Lord Montagu's absence from the province 
a letter was received from the Earl of Hillsborough 
calling his attention to the Massachusetts circular of 
February 11 and telling him to use his best efforts to 
induce the South Carolina assembly to disregard it.^ 
Consequently, in his opening speech on November 17, 
the governor asked the commons to discountenance and 
treat with contempt any letter or paper that might ap- 
pear to have the smallest tendency to sedition or to 
inflame the minds of the people against the authority 
of parliament.^ On the very next day, the forbidden 
letter of February 11 and also the Virginia letter of 
May 9 were laid before the house by Speaker Mani- 
gault. They were read and referred to a committee 
consisting of Messrs. Parsons, Gadsden, Laurens, Pinck- 
ney, Rutledge, Lloyd, Elliot, Lynch, and Dart.^ With 
the addition of Lynch and Dart, this was the same com- 
mittee that had been appointed to draw up an address 
in answer to the governor's opening speech. They 
were now added to the latter committee, making the 

1 Bull to the Earl of Hillsborougli, October 18, 1768, PuUic Records, 
Ms., XXXII, 5(5-57. 

2 Ibid., 3G, 56; Coin. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part III, 21. 
A special secretaryship of state for the colonies was created in 1768 and 
the Earl of Hillsborough was the first secretary. 

'Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part III, 6. 
* Ibid., y-lG. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVERNMENT 363 

personnel of the two exactly the same. Both com- 
mittees reported on the 19th. First, a humble ad- 
dress to His Excellency stated that no letter or paper 
of a seditious character had yet come before the house, 
and, if such should come, that they would treat it with 
the contempt which it deserved.^ 

The doors of the house were then locked, and the 
other committee reported a series of resolutions to the 
effect that the letters under consideration were ' ' replete 
with duty and loyalty to His Majesty, respect for the 
Parliament of Great Britain, sincere affection for our 
Mother Country, tender care for the preservation of 
the rights of all His Majesty's Subjects, and founded 
upon undeniable Constitutional Principles;" that a 
humble and loyal address should be presented to His 
Majesty imploring him to relieve his American sub- 
jects from their grievances; and that the speaker 
should be directed to send these resolutions to the 
speakers of the Massachusetts and Virginia assemblies 
and assure them that their measures had met with the 
entire approbation of the commons of South Carolina.' 

The doors were thrown open again and the whole 
house waited on the governor to present their ad- 
dress. In reply, he infoinned them that His Majesty 
regarded the Massachusetts circular of February 11 
as a seditious document, and he gave them warning to 
disregard it or take the consequences of their foWj.^ 

The assembly returned to their own chamber and 
barely had time to pass the following order when they 

iC'om. House Journals, Ms., XXXVII, Part III, 17-19. 
2 Ibid., 19-20; Puhlic liecoids, Ms., XXXII, 61-64. 
•i Com. House Journals, Ms., XXVII, Part III, 21. 



364 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

were dissolved by the governor: "Ordered, That His 
Excellency's speech to His Majesty's Council and this 
House with the address of this House to His Excellency, 
and His Excellency's answer thereto, and also the letter 
from the Honorable Thomas Gushing, Esquire, Speaker 
of the late House of Representatives of the Province 
of Massachusetts Bay, and the Letter from the Honor- 
able Peyton Randolph, Esquire, Speaker of the House 
of Burgesses of Virginia, addressed to the Speaker of 
the late House of Assembly of this Province, and laid 
by him before this House with the resolutions of this 
House thereupon, and all other matters relating thereto 
be jDrinted and made public."^ 

Governor Montagu became very angry and declared 
to the Earl of Hillsborough that he would not call a new 
assembly until he received special instructions from 
His Majesty to do so.^ Nevertheless, writs were issued 
February 8, returnable on March 21. His Excellency 
did not permit the house to meet, however, but pro- 
rogued them from time to time until the middle of June, 
Then instructions were received from the Earl of Hills- 
borough authorizing the issue of election writs,^ and 
the houses were called together on the 15th. No 
quorum appeared and they were adjourned to June 26. 
All the old leaders were returned and Peter Manigault 
was again chosen speaker without opposition.^ 

Governor Montagu, in his opening speech on the 27th, 
declared that His Majesty did not wish the province 

iC'o/,!. Hovsc -Jouynals, Ms.. XXVII, Vnvt III, 21-22. 

2 Public Records, 31s., XXXI], 73. 

*Ibid., 75. 

*Cot)i. House Jounials, Ms., XXXVIII, 1-19. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 365 

to suffer any longer because of the intemperate resolu- 
tions of tlie late assembly, and had, accordingly, au- 
thorized the summoning of a new assembly. Calling 
attention to the deplorable condition of the back coun- 
try, he inforaied the house of the objections made by 
the Board of Trade to the circuit court act of 1768 and 
urged them to consider the matter again. ^ 

Two committees were at once appointed by the house, 
one on grievances and the other to prepare an answer 
to the governor's speech. The fonner reported on the 
28th that it was a grievance that the assembly had been 
adjourned from April 12 to September 6, 1768, that the 
next house, which met on November 15, was dissolved 
four days later, and that the present house was pre- 
vented by divers prorogations from sitting until June 
15, in direct violation of the election law of 1721, which 
required sittings of the assembly at least once in every 
six months. To the great grievance of the province, 
the assembly had been in session only five days in four- 
teen months. The house agreed to the report and 
adopted resolutions in accordance therewith.^ Two 
days later the other committee made its report, and a 
humble address was drawn up and sent to the governor. 
The house expressed sorrow that their necessary and 
constitutional resolutions had given so much offense 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 11. The back country had 
been settled very rapidly and was entirely without courts of justice. 
The act of 1768 provided for circuit courts, but it was disallowed in 
England. Another act passed in the following year received the king's 
approval and was put into force in 1772. This question is considered 
more in detail in the chapter on the judiciary. 8ee 133-141. 

^Ihid., 17-19. 



366 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVmCE 

as to cause a discontinuance of the meetings of the as- 
sembly beyond the period allowed by law. They were 
willing to believe that he meant no infringement on 
their rights and privileges, but hoped that this would 
not be made a precedent. In conclusion they declared 
their readiness to do all in their power for the relief 
of the settlers in the back country and to attend to the 
other matters suggested by His Excellency. The gov- 
ernor simply returned thanks for the address and as- 
sured the house that he had never intended to infringe 
any of the rights of the people, especially when they 
had the sanction of a law.^ 

The assembly now proceeded to business. The dis- 
pute with the governor over the question of furnishing 
supplies to British troops has already been discussed. 
It aroused more or less ill feeling, but did not x^revent 
the passage of a new circuit court act. 

His Excellency, Lord Charles Greville Montagu, set 
sail for England on July 31, 1769,- and for the fourth 
time the burdens of government fell upon William Bull. 
During the two years of his administration the spirit 
of rebellion and along with it the desire for union 
spread rapidly throughout the colonies. On December 
15, 1768, the House of Lords adopted a series of eight 
resolutions condemning the recent proceedings of the 
people of Massachusetts Bay, and prepared an address 
to the king praying that persons accused of treason in 
the colonies should be brought to England for trial, 
according to the statute 35 Henry VIII, chap. 2. The 

iCom. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 20-21, 23. 
<^ Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 91. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT ;^67 

House of Commons agreed to both the resohitions and 
the address, and the king expressed his approval early 
in February, 1769/ 

The Virginia House of Burgesses was the first to 
utter a protest. They adopted a series of resolutions, 
on May 16, and directed their speaker to send copies of 
them to the speakers of the various assemblies through- 
out the continent and to request their concurrence 
therein. They resolved that the sole right of imposing 
taxes on the inhabitants of Virginia was legally and 
constitutionally vested in the House of Burgesses ; that 
it was the undoubted privilege of the people of Vir- 
ginia to petition their sovereign for a redress of griev- 
ances, and lawful and expedient for them to procure 
the concurrence of His Majesty's other colonies in 
praying the royal interposition in favor of the violated 
rights of America ; and finally, that all persons accused 
of treason or any other crime committed m the colony 
should be tried by a jury of their neighbors and not 
transported beyond the seas.^ 

These resolutions had barely been adopted when the 
Burgesses were dissolved by the governor. Speaker 
Eandolph carried out the order of the house, however, 
and sent copies of the resolutions to the various colonial 
assemblies. They were read before the South Caro- 
lina assembly, on August 17, and entered upon the 
journals. Two days later, when thirty-seven of the 

1 Cohbett, Parliamentary History, XVI, 476-480, 494-511; Lecky, 
England in the Eighteenth Century, III, 363-364. 

^Com. House Jotirnals, Ms., XXXVIII, 165-166. See Bancroft, 
Hist, of the United States, Edition 1878, IV, 158-160. 



368 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

forty-one qualified members were present, tlie house 
unanimously adopted the resolutions, with the necessary 
changes in phraseology, and with the addition of one 
to the effect that the statute 35 Henry VIII, chap. 2, 
could not extend to the colonies, where there w^as suffi- 
cient provision made by the laws of the land for the 
trial of persons accused of treason.^ 

Four days later, the assembly was prorogued to No- 
vember 7. In a letter to the Earl of Hillsborough, Bull 
excused himself for not putting an immediate stop to 
their proceedings by dissolution. ''Experience," said 
he, "had shown that a repetition of such marks of dis- 
pleasure had not produced any good effects of changing 
men or measures in the present universal jealousies of 
the people, but had tended rather to furnish the more 
turbulent and factious with popular arguments to keep 
up their clamors and feed their discontent. ' ' ^ 

On November 7, the assembly was further prorogued 
to the 28th. Meanwhile, the colony was very much 
agitated over the non-importation agreement. An 
agreement was drawn up, on June 28, binding the 
signers to encourage and promote the use of American 
manufactures in general and those of South Carolina 
in particular. They were not to import any goods 
from Great Britain, except negro cloth, powder, lead, 
nails, and a few other necessaries. Finally, they looked 
upon every inhabitant who refused to sign this agree- 
ment within one month as an enemy to the true inter- 
ests of the colony, and pledged themselves neither to 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 174-17G. 
2 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 95. 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 369 

purchase from nor sell to such person any goods or 
merchandise whatever/ A new form of agreement, 
slightly changed, was adopted at a mass meeting on 
July 22. These were to remain in force until the ob- 
jectionable acts of parliament were repealed. Many 
signatures were obtained, some voluntarily, others 
through the fear of social and business ostracism. 
Considerable excitement and ill feeling were aroused. 
The principal opponents of the measure, William 
Wragg and William Henry Drayton, expressed their 
views at great length in the Gazette. Christopher 
Gadsden and others replied in defense of it." 

The assembly met promptly on November 28. Some 
ordinary business was disposed of, and an adjournment 
was taken from December 8 to January 9. Just before 
adjourning, the house adopted the following order and 
resolution : 

"Ordered, That the Public Treasurer do advance the sum 
of ten thousand five hundred Pounds Currency out of any 
money in the Treasury, to be paid into the Hands of Mr. 
Speaker, Mr. Gadsden, Mr. Rutledge, Mr. Parsons, Mr. Fergu- 
son, Mr. Dart, and Mr. Lynch, who are to remit the same to 
Great Britain, for the support of the just and Constitutional 
Rights and Liberties of the People of Great Britain and 
America. 

"Resolved, That this House will make provision to reim- 
burse the Public Treasurer the said sum."" 

^ruhlic Records, Ms., XXXII, 81-83. 

2 An interesting account of this controversy will be found in Mc- 
Crady, 8. Car. under Royal Govt., 044-658. 
' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 215. 
24 



370 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

With this money, bills of exchange for fifteen hun- 
dred pounds sterling were purchased and sent to Eng- 
land at the first opportunity. In a letter to the Earl 
of Hillsborough, under date of December 12, Lieuten- 
ant-Governor Bull stated that it was probably to be 
used for the support of the Bill of Rights Society in 
London, which was collecting funds to pay the debts of 
the notorious John Wilkes. Bull then went on to ex- 
plain how it was that money could be drawn from the 
treasury without the governor's consent. It was, he 
declared, merely a part of a general movement toward 
democracy. Since the first establishment of the colony 
the people had been gradually acquiring greater and 
greater control over the government. The king him- 
self was chiefly responsible for this, for, in his desire 
to encourage the settlement of the ])rovince, he had been 
too generous in granting civil and religious indulgences. 
At first, when emergencies had to be met, the practice 
was for the governor, council, and assembly to concur 
in an order to the treasurer to advance the amount of 
money desired, and then to resolve that provision for 
repayment would be made in the next annual tax bill. 
The second step was for the lower house alone to re- 
solve in regard to the reimbursement of the treasurer. 
Then, as their control over money bills became more 
extensive, it was but natural that they alone should pass 
the original order on the treasurer. The only control 
now left to the council was the power to oppose the tax 
bill which provided for the repayment of the amount 
advanced. They did this on several occasions, says 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 371 

Bull, but in the end were always compelled to yield.^ 
In this particular case the commons house attempted 
to follow the method of procedure just described. The 
schedule of the next annual tax bill contained an item 
jjroviding for the repayment to Treasurer Jacob Motte 
of the money advanced by him under the resolution of 
December 8. The council returned the bill and sched- 
ule, on April 5, 1770, expressed surprise at the item 
in question, and declared that they would never give 
their sanction to a measure which contained a provision 
tacitly affronting His Majesty's government. Further, 
they denied the right of the assembly to issue money 
out of the treasury without the governor's consent or 
for any other than local or provincial purposes. In 
conclusion, they stated that they would not pass the bill 
and tnist to the lieutenant-governor to reject it, lest 
he should, like a former governor, construe their con- 
currence as advice from his council to assent to it.- 

The commons referred this message to a committee, 
which reported a long series of resolutions on the 10th. 
Among other things, they denied the charge that they 
could approjDriate money only for local purposes, and 
declared that they had always exercised the undisputed 
right of borrowing money out of the treasury. Finally, 
they took up the most vulnerable paragraph of the 
council's message, namely, that which related to a 
former governor's taking the concurrence of the legis- 
lative council as their advice to pass a bill. Such lan- 
guage, they said, simply served to prove the duplicity 

^PulUc Records, Ms., XXXII, 132-133. 

2 Com. House .Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 387-388. 



372 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PEOVINCE 

of those members who could, as an upper house, pass a 
bill which they intended, as a privy council, to advise 
the governor to reject— conduct which could not fail to 
prove to His Majesty the absurdity and inconsistency 
of their acting in that double capacity, and, they hoped, 
would induce him to grant the province an upper house 
distinct from the privy council and composed of inde- 
pendent men of property/ 

On the following day, before the house had time to 
consider these resolutions, they were adjourned to June 
5. Aside from one day sessions on June 5 and July 
23, the recess was continued to August 14.^ 

Meanwhile the whole matter was under consideration 
in England. Lord Hillsborough laid the case, with all 
the papers relating to it, before William de Grey, 
the attorney-general. De Grey made his report on 
February 13, 1770. Beginning with the first charter to 
the proprietors, he gave a brief history of the province 
with special reference to the disputes over money bills. 
He assumed that the constitution of the province was 
to be found in the governor's commission and instruc- 
tions, which allowed both houses the sole control over 
money bills. After this brief historical summary, he 
proceeded to deliver his opinion on the points at issue. 
In the first place, he declared that the house of assembly 
of South Carolina could not legally order the payment 
of money out of the public treasury without the con- 
currence of governor and council. Such a power could 
not be warranted by the modern practice of a few years, 

1 Co7n. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 389-392. 

2 Ihid., 392-397. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 373 

irregularly introduced and improvidently acquiesced 
in. Secondly, the order of December 8 was also illegal, 
because the money advanced was not to be applied to 
the particular service of the province. In the third 
place, the order of payment being thus illegal, the pay- 
ment itself was illegal, but he did not think it just to 
hold the treasurer liable, after the frequent acquiescence 
in similar orders. In conclusion, he said that preven- 
tive measures should be taken for the future, but 
whether this should be done by act of parliament or by 
instructions to the governor he left to the wisdom of 
His Majesty's servants.^ 

This rej3ort came before the privy council and it 
was decided that an additional instruction to the gov- 
ernor should settle the matter. The instruction, dated 
April 14, 1770, forbade the governor, under penalty 
of removal from office, to give his assent to any bill 
api^ropriating money for other than provincial pur- 
poses, except on a special requisition from the king. 
The governor was also instructed to see that in money 
bills for the future a clause was inserted subjecting the 
public treasurer to a treble penalty and loss of office 
for paying out any monej^ except by a special order 
contained in some act or ordinance of the general 
assembly.^ 

It remained now to be seen how the assembly would 
receive this unequivocal expression of the royal will. 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull laid a copy of the instnic- 
tion before them on August 16, and it was referred to 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 106-181. The last part of this report 
containing the opinion is given in Chalmers, Colonial Opinions, 296-298. 

2 Public Records, Ms., XXXIIJ 236-240. 



374 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

a committee.^ The resolutions, reported and adopted 
on the 29th, contain the boldest declaration of rights 
that the South Carolinians had yet put forth. First, 
they resolved that the assembly had a right to grant 
money, with or without a requisition from His Majesty, 
for any purposes whatsoever, whenever they thought 
it expedient for the public service. It was further 
resolved that they had a right to order the public 
treasurer to advance money on a resolution of their 
house to repay it— a right which they had often exer- 
cised, and which the present lieutenant-governor and 
his predecessors had acquiesced in; that their resolu- 
tion of December 8 was not unconstitutional, but 
strictly in accordance with the usage and practice of 
their house; and that they would not insert the re- 
quired clauses relating to the treasurer in any tax 
bill. Perhaps the committee had by this time become 
startled at their own boldness. At any rate, in the 
final resolution they hinted that they were not denying 
the powers of the king, but were simply resisting the 
unjust pretensions of his ministers. Thus, they re- 
solved, "That it is the opinion of this Committee that 
a Minister's dictating how a Money Bill shall be framed 
is an Infringement of the Privileges of this House, 
to whom alone it belongs to Originate and prepare the 
same for the concurrence and assent of the Governor 
and Council without any alteration or amendment 
whatsoever."* 

The difficulty was soon complicated still further by 
the death of Jacob Motte, the provincial treasurer. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 403-405. 

2 Ibid., 430-433. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 375 

The assembly at once passed a bill for appointing his 
successor, which was amended in the council along 
the lines of the additional instruction. The lower 
house struck out the amendments, and the bill was re- 
jected by the council on September 7. At the same 
time another tax bill was rejected because it contained 
the objectionable clause for repaying the treasurer the 
ten thousand five hundred pounds advanced to the 
Wilkes fund. On the request of the assembly for 
leave to adjourn, Lieutenant-Governor Bull prorogued 
them from September 8 to January 16, 1771.^ 

In reply to the lieutenant-governor's opening speech 
of January 16, the assembly said that they had done 
all they could to sustain the public credit, but that the 
council had rejected every tax bill sent to them. Tak- 
ing up the additional instruction of April 14, they de- 
clared it to be both unnecessary and unconstitutional. 
Ministers were fallible as well as other men and often 
made errors. Instructions had been sent to several of 
the American governors, "which were diametrically 
opposite to Reason, Law, and the Constitution of the 
Colonies they were sent to, and which consequently 
were not carried into execution."^ 

The sentence just quoted suggests a consideration of 
two conflicting theories in regard to the colonial con- 
stitution. From the standpoint of the king and min- 
istry the constitution of the province was a written one, 
consisting of the commissions and instructions to the. 
governors. Furthermore, they were strict constnic- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 45o-450. 

2 Ibid., 464-465. 



376 SOFTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

tionists. If they wished a change they could easily 
make it ; the colonists had no recourse but to acquiesce. 
The people of the colony, on the other hand, while ad- 
mitting that the instructions expressed the will of the 
home government, maintained that the power of the 
government itself was limited. There were certain 
rights and privileges which were the heritage of Eng- 
lishmen, wherever they might fix their home. One 
of these rights, which they were determined to main- 
tain in the face of all the instructions ever devised, 
was the right to tax themselves through their own 
representatives for whatever purposes they saw fit. A 
claim of the assembly, once recognized by the governor 
and council, was to them a part of the constitution— a 
more important part indeed than the instructions to the 
governor, for such precedents were often directly con- 
trary to the instructions. They were loose construc- 
tionists. So far as they obsei-ved the commissions and 
instructions at all, they interpreted them in a very 
liberal manner. An example of this has already been 
noticed in connection with Governor Nicholson's thirty- 
fifth instruction. He was forbidden to allow the as- 
sembly any power or privilege not allowed by the king 
to the House of Commons in England. The interpreta- 
tion placed upon this was that the assembly possessed 
all the powers and privileges of the House of Commons, 
including the sole power of framing and amending 
money bills. 

In the corporate colonies of New England the re- 
verse was true. The home government, in moments 
of thoughtlessness, granted powers and privileges, 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVEKNMENT 377 

which they would afterwards have been glad to 
revoke. The colonists, however, cherished their charter 
constitutions and resisted every attempt to weaken 
them through a loose interpretation. New England 
was thus the champion of strict constiniction, while the 
provinces, mostly in the south, were loose construc- 
tionists.^ 

The dispute over the additional instruction continued 
to occupy public attention to the exclusion of all busi- 
ness. The assembly adopted an ingenious scheme to 
entrap Lieutenant-Governor Bull into giving up the 
point at issue. Thus, on January 31, they ordered the 
acting public treasurer ^ to pay into his hands the sum 
of seven pounds currency per head to aid the poor 
Irish Protestants who had recently arrived. He re- 
fused the bait, however, and stated that he would accept 
the money only when it was voted by an ordinance of 
the general assembly.^ 

The next move made by the assembly affords an in- 
teresting example of their skill in interpreting instruc- 
tions. They even went so far as to intimate that they 
would agree to the additional instruction if their inter- 
pretation was accepted. In a message of February 27, 

1 A few words sliould be said in qualification of this statement. The 
New England colonies did occasionally adopt a policy of loose construc- 
tion when they felt that it would serA'e their end and would escape the 
attention of the English government. The most familiar example of 
this was of course the use made by Massachusetts of a trading com- 
pany's charter as the constitution of a colony. 

2 Henry Peronneau, who had been assistant treasurer under Colonel 
Motte. By an act of February 23, 1771, he and Benjamin Dart were 
elected joint treasurers. Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 494; 
Btatuics, IV, 326-327. 

3 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 474, 476. 



378 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVINCE 

they pointed out a distinction between those funds in 
the treasury which could be granted by them alone and 
those which could be granted only with the joint con- 
sent of governor, council, and assembly. The receipts 
for each year's tax usually exceeded the amount appro- 
priated to His Majesty for that year. Thus there would 
be a surplus in the treasury which had not been granted 
specifically to the king. This was the people's money 
and the assembly as their representatives had the sole 
right to dispose of it. They could vote to use it for 
the next year's expenses and thus reduce the taxes, or 
they could, by a resolution of their house alone, advance 
it for some particular purposes. The governors had 
never objected to this, but had often encouraged it by 
message. On the other hand, there were frequently 
large sums lying in particular funds, ^ which the house 
had good reason to believe would not be called for be- 
fore they could be replaced. Such money having been 
solemnly appropriated, no longer belonged to the people, 
hence the assembly would always ask the concurrence 
of the governor and council in resolutions to borrow it, 
and provision was always made for repayment. The 
order in favor of the poor Protestants was of the former 
character, to be paid out of the unappropriated surplus 
in the treasurer's hands. The additional instruction, 
so they argued, was intended to cover the other case 
only, where the money had already been appropriated 
to some other purpose.^ 

1 An example of such a fund was the fortification fund, formed by 
the annual appropriation of five thousanu pounds currency out of the 
proceeds of the general duty act. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 497-499. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 379 

His Honor was not convinced by such reasoning and 
the controversy was continued. The assembly ad- 
journed on March 20, and a quorum for business did 
not come together again until after Lord Montagu's 
return to the province. He arrived in Charleston on 
September 16, and the general assembly met one day 
later. The lower house at once proceeded to pass a 
tax bill for the years 1769 and 1770. One clause in the 
estimate was for £28,123:14:8 to the estate of Jacob 
Motte, to reimburse him for the money advanced for 
the bounty to Irish Protestants, for the survey of the 
province, for encouraging the culture of silk, and for 
other services. The phrase for other services, as was 
well known, included the £10,500 advanced to the Wilkes 
fund. On November 4, the council returned the bill, 
with their objections to that article, and stated that 
they were forbidden by instruction from passing any 
tax act which did not contain a clause inflicting treble 
penalty and forfeiture of office on the public treasurer 
for paying out money other than by an express order 
contained in some act or ordinance of the general as- 
sembly. To this the house replied that they would 
never regard any ministerial instruction in framing a 
money bill nor alter any part of the estimate on the 
requisition of the council.^ 

The dissolution of the assembly was brought about 
by the following bold move on their part: An order 
was passed, on October 2, requiring Henry Peronneau 
and Benjamin Dart, joint public treasurers, "to ad- 
vance to the Commissioners appointed on the Silk 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 577-578. 



380 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PKOVIXCE 

Manufacture a sum not exceeding Three Thousand 
Founds Currency, to enable them to purchase with 
ready Money, raw Silk of the produce of this Province, 
to be transported to Great Britain for sale." The 
commissioners applied for three hundred pounds, as 
part of this order, but the treasurers refused to ad- 
vance it. Complaint was made to the assembly, and they 
summoned Peronneau and Dart before them to show 
cause why they had not paid the order. The treasurers 
replied that they were afraid to advance the monej'" in 
the face of His Majesty's additional instruction and 
a positive order from the governor and council. They 
were then asked, once for all, if they would make the 
payment, and, on giving a negative answer, were or- 
dered to withdraw. The assembly immediately re- 
solved that they had violated and treated with contempt 
the authority and privileges of their house and that 
they should be committed to prison in the common gaol 
at Charleston. A warrant was then issued and signed 
by Speaker Manigault, requiring the messenger of the 
house to arrest Peronneau and Dart and convey them 
to gaol. At the same time, the provost marshal or 
keeper of the gaol was ordered to take them into cus- 
tody. Governor Montagu put a stop to these proceed- 
ings by an immediate dissolution.^ 

Late in February of the following year, writs were 
issued for a new assembly to meet on April 2.^ In the 
meantime. Lord Montagu had applied to the home gov- 
ernment for advice. A letter from the Earl of Hills- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVIII, 543, 579-584. 

2 Council Journals, Ms., XXXVI, Part II, 56. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 381 

borough, under date of January 11, 1772, assured him 
that the king approved of his conduct in dissolving the 
late assembly and wished him to adhere to the addi- 
tional instruction of April 14, 1770, and to put a stop 
by dissolution or prorogation to any further attempt 
of the assembly to carry into etfect their unconstitu- 
tional claim of the right to dispose of public money 
without the consent of governor and council. Further, 
he was to inform the assembly that if they persisted in 
their attempts to violate the constitution, he would 
again dissolve them.^ 

Accordingly, when the assembly met on April 2, 
His Excellency acquainted them of the king's disap- 
probation of the conduct of the previous assembly and 
of his instructions to dissolve them in case they should 
follow a similar course. The commons refused to do 
business under such restrictions, so the governor issued 
a proclamation of dissolution on the 10th,- 

Lord Montagu now adopted a plan of campaign by 
which he felt sure that he could bring the assembly to 
terms. An election was ordered to be held for an as- 
sembly to meet at Beaufort, Port Royal, on October 8. 
The reasons for this move were outlined in a letter to 
Lord Hillsborough. The leaders of the opposition lived 
in Charleston. They had already resolved to pass no tax 
bill that contained the treasurer clause of the additional 
instruction, or that did not contain the ten thousand 
five hundred pounds item. Many of these men would 

' Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 107-108. 

'^ Ibid., 140, 142. The journals for this short session are lost; the 
account given above is taken from letters in the Public Records. 



382 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

be prevented by their private affairs from attending 
at Beaufort, especially if the assembly was not allowed 
to sit at once, but was continued by short and frequent 
prorogations. Furthermore, the people of Beaufort 
were ready to support the royal interests in the hope 
of having the seat of government pennanently located 
in their town. In the absence of the violent party, the 
conservative members living in and around Beaufort 
could be induced to pass a tax bill and attend to other 
business. Then, too, the Charleston interest might be 
brought to terms for fear of losing the seat of govern- 
ment.'^ 

A few days after the writs were issued, Montagu's 
plans were changed by the receipt of a letter from Lord 
Hillsborough, stating that His Majesty desired the as- 
sembly to sit as soon as possible for the dispatch of 
business.^ He decided to allow the house to assemble 
in Beaufort and then at once prorogue them to meet in 
Charleston.' 

This plan was carried out. To the governor's in- 
tense chagrin, all the Charleston members left their 
private affairs and were at Beaufort when the session 
opened on October 8. Thirty-four members were pres- 
ent on the first day, an unusually large attendance. 
The Honorable Peter Manigault was again unanimously 
chosen speaker.^ His Excellency kept the assembly 
waiting for three days before he received them to pre- 

^Puhlic Records, Ms., XXXIII, 174-178. 

^Ibid., 163. 

3 Ibid., 179. 

* Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part I, 1-2. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 383 

sent their speaker. They were then prorogued to 
meet at Charleston on the 22d.' 

As may well be imagined, the commons house assem- 
bled on the appointed day in no very pleasant frame 
of mind. The first business attended to was the ap- 
pointment of a committee on grievances, of which 
Captain Gadsden was chairman. The committee re- 
ported a series of resolutions on the 29th. They 
resolved that the calling of the assembly to meet at 
Beaufort, a place very distant from Charleston, and 
at that season of the year extremely unhealthy, was an 
act of ill will toward the freemen of the province; that 
it was an unwarrantable abuse of the royal prerogative ; 
that the governor's conduct in keeping at Beaufort the 
fullest house that ever sat at the beginning of any 
session three days before he would receive them with 
their speaker, and then immediately proroguing them, 
was adding insult to injury; and that his proroguing 
the assembly without allowing them to sit one minute 
as a legislative body was an evasion, if not a direct 
violation, of the election act, which required that sit- 
tings should not be discontinued longer than six 
months. The committee recommended that the agent 
in England should be instnicted to lay before His 
Majesty an account of the governor's arbitrary con- 
duct and attempt to secure his removal.^ 

His Excellency was on the lookout for these resolu- 
tions and carefully perused the house journals at the 
close of each day. On the evening of the day when the 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part I, 4-0. 
Ubid., 20-21. 



384 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

report was made lie sent as usual to the clerk of the 
house for the journals. That official announced that 
the speaker" had taken them into his possession. 
Montagu at once wrote to the speaker for them, but 
they were not delivered until the next day, just before 
the meeting of the house. The manuscript was so 
blotted and interlined that it took him some time to 
decipher it. When he finally arrived at the meaning 
of the resolutions, he determined to prevent their 
adoption by proroguing the assembly. Accordingly, 
he commanded their immediate attendance in the 
council chamber. The members of the house were 
expecting this move, however, and had already begun 
to consider the report. The discussion was kept up 
a few minutes after the receipt of the governor's mes- 
sage, and the report was agreed to and ordered to be 
published. The house then went up to the council 
chamber and were prorogued to November 9.^ 

Montagu was thrown into a violent passion when he 
saw by the journals of the 30th that the house had 
continued to carry on business after receiving his order 
to attend in the council chamber. As soon as a quorum 
was secured on November 10, he severely reprimanded 
them for their conduct and pronounced their dissolu- 
tion.^ 

Election writs were issued and a new assembly met 
January 6, 1773. The Honorable Rawlins Lowndes was 

1 Rawlins Lowndes, Speaker Manigault having resigned on tlie 28th. 
Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part I, 17. 

2 /bid., 25-26; Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 188-189. 
>Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part I, 27-29. 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 385 

again chosen speaker and was presented to the governor 
for his approbation. He refused to approve of their 
choice and directed them to hold another election. On 
the following day, they sent up a verbal message as- 
serting their right to choose their own speaker and 
persisting in the choice which they had made. His 
Excellency now prorogued the assembly for a few days, 
and, on the 12th, issued a proclamation of dissolution.^ 

Another general assembly, the thirty-third and last 
of the royal period, was called to meet February 23, 
1773. Among the popular leaders returned were 
Gadsden, Eutledge, Powell, Lowndes, Parsons, Bee, 
and the two Pinckneys, Charles and Charles Cotesworth. 
Before the day of meeting the house was prorogued to 
March 8. A quorum did not assemble until the 11th, 
one day after the governor's final departure for Eng- 
land.' 

Weary of the n^^equal struggle and broken in health. 
Lord Charles Greville Montagu sailed for home in 
His Majesty's packet. The Eagle, March 10, 1773.^ 
Three months later, Lord William Campbell, governor 
of Nova Scotia, was transferred to South Carolina. 
As he did not come to the province for two years, the 
government devolved upon Lieutenant-Governor Bull 
for the fifth time. Although he still held a firm place 
in the confidence and aifection of the people, Bull 
"realized that he had a veiy difficult task before him. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 1; Public Records, Ms., 
XXXIII, 204-205. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 1-3. 
^Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 225. 
*Ibid., 198, 231-255. 
25 



386 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PEOVINCE 

The question was, could peace and good will be restored 
without the recall of the additional instruction, for it 
was evident that the British ministry had no intention 
of doing that. 

The assembly met on the day following Lord 
Montagu's departure. Rawlins Lowndes was again 
chosen speaker and was formally approved by the 
lieutenant-governor. In his opening speech, Dr. Bull 
used very conciliatory language, making no reference 
to the recent disputes, but urging a consideration of 
the state of the public treasury.^ A tax bill for the 
years 1769 and 1770 was at once passed through two 
readings and sent to the council. It was rejected by 
them, because it contained the objectionable ten thou- 
sand five hundred pounds item and omitted the clause 
required by the additional instruction. The assembly 
then asked and obtained leave to adjourn until July 6.^ 

The chief features of colonial history from 1773 to 
1776 were the growth of the spirit of rebellion and the 
rapid development of a sentiment of union. Thus we 
find the South Carolina assembly spending part of 
their time in disputes with the governor and council 
over local issues and part in providing for a closer 
union with the other colonies. We shall take up first 
the local features and consider the final act in the 
struggle between the popular and prerogative elements. 
Then we shall trace the growth of the movement 
toward union, which made it possible for the South 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 4-6. 
'Ibid., 17, 23; Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 227. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 387 

Carolinians to oppose His Majesty's army as obsti- 
nately as they had opposed his governor. 

The additional instruction of 1770 still continued to 
give trouble, but public attention was soon drawn to 
another dispute which threatened to overthrow the 
whole constitution of the province. This was nothing 
less than a renewal, in a more aggressive form, of the 
old attack on the right of the council to sit as an upper 
house of the legislature. The question first came up 
during Governor Glen's administration. It will be 
remembered that he became so angry at being excluded 
from participation in the council's legislative duties, 
as to openly deny their right to act in any but an ad- 
visory capacity. The assembly thought this a good 
opportunity to get rid of their consei'vative opponents 
altogether. About the year 1745, two of their mem- 
bers visited the governor in a private capacity, and 
desired to know whether he would ratify a bill pre- 
sented to him by the assembly, without sending it to 
the council, as usual, for their concurrence. Seeing that 
the assembly would gain more by the proposed change 
than he would, and realizing the difficulty he would 
have in explaining his conduct at home, Glen gave a 
negative reply. ^ 

This gave a check to the attacks, but they were re- 
newed occasionally in debate, especially when the 
council opposed some of the schemes of the assembly. 
The assembly stopped using the terms upper house and 
loiver house entirely. They refused to receive a mes- 
sage, July 6, 1764, because it was signed by the speaker, 

' Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 306. 



388 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

which implied that the council was a branch of the 
legislature. Later in the same month, the council 
took a bold stand and refused to receive a communi- 
cation from the assembly because it was not addressed 
to the upper Jiouse. They were forced to yield the 
point however, and accept messages addressed to His 
Majesty 's Council? 

Similar attacks were made from time to time in the 
newspapers. The thorough discussion of the question 

by T s W 1 in the Gazette of May 13, 1756, 

has already been noticed. - 

The assembly did not restrict themselves to making 
claims, but gradually extended their actual powers. 
In a letter to Lord Hillsborough, of November 30, 1770, 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull compared the relative posi- 
tions of the two houses at that time with what they had 
been a few years before. Business, he stated, had 
formerly been planned by joint committees of council 
and assembly, and differences settled in conferences. 
The assembly had broken off this intercourse, however, 
and there had not been a conference in ten or fifteen 
years. Furthermore, the council seldom initiated any 
legislation at all, and never dared to introduce or amend 
a money bill.^ 

The dispute was renewed in the following manner: 
During the August session of 1773, the assembly passed 
a bill appropriating £100,000 to rebuild Fort Johnson 
and another to prevent the counterfeiting of the paper 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXVI, 109, 129. 

2 See Chapter VI, Financial History, 325-327. 

3 Public Records, Ms., XXXII, 372-374. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 389 

money of the other colonies, the last mentioned being 
the result of a representation made by the committee 
of correspondence of the Virginia House of Burgesses. ^ 
After the bills had been before the council for several 
days, a message was sent up by the assembly urging 
haste, especially on the bill to prevent counterfeiting. 
Whether they were dissatisfied at the origin of the 
act, or whether they were unwilling to pass any meas- 
ure until the assembly rendered obedience to the addi- 
tional instruction is not clear, but, at all events, the 
third reading was postponed sine die.'^ 

The members of the council at this time were Daniel 
Blake, Barnard Elliot, John Drayton, and his son 
William Henry Drayton, all native South Carolinians, 
and Sir Egerton Leigh, Thomas Skottowe, Thomas 
Knox Gordon, John Burns, and John Stuart, royal 
placemen. Blake and Bums were absent in England, 
and Stuart, superintendent of Indian affairs, was an 
extraordinary councilor, who rarely attended.' John 
Drayton was a brother-in-law of Lieutenant-Governor 
Bull. His son, William Henry, had but recently secured 
a seat in the council through his able opposition to the 
non-importation agreement and the Wilkes fund grant. 

When the motion to postpone the reading of the bill 
to prevent counterfeiting was adopted, the two Dray- 
tons obtained leave of the council to enter their protest 
on the journals. A copy of the said protest was pub- 
lished by Thomas Powell in the South Carolina Gazette 

' Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 27-28. 
'^Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 310, 342-343. 
Ubid., XXXIV, 228-229. 



390 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of August 30. The council summoned Powell before 
tliem on the 31st, and, after resolving that the publica- 
tion of any of their proceedings without their consent 
was a high breach of privilege and contempt of their 
house, ordered him to be committed to the common 
gaol in Charleston during their pleasure. A warrant 
of commitment was made out directed to Roger Pinck- 
ney, sheriff of Charleston district, and signed by Eger- 
ton Leigh, president of the upper house of assembly.^ 
Powell applied to Rawlins Lowndes and George 
Gabriel Powell, two of His Majesty's justices of the 
peace, for a writ of habeas corpus. Upon the return 
of the writ a formal hearing was held, and an order 
was issued for Powell's discharge from custody.^ In 
a long argument, Lowndes first stated it as a principle 
that either house of parliament had always had the 
right of committing to prison for breach of privileges, 
and that no court or judge would ever attempt to dis- 
charge a prisoner so committed. He then based his 
opinion on the fact that the council had no analogy to 
the House of Lords, was not independent and not 
hereditary, and, in short, was not a legislative body at 
all. They were always called by the king in his in- 
structions, the council, and were merely authorized to 
consult and advise with the governor as to whether or 
not he should reject bills passed by the assembly. The 
mere right to advise the governor to accept or reject 
a bill could not imply all the privileges of an upper 
house of parliament. The commitment, therefore, was 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 318, 343. 

2 Ibid., 320-322. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 391 

to be considered merely as an act of the privy council, 
and of no more authority than if authorized by a pri- 
vate magistrate. Hence the subject had his remedy by 
habeas corpus.^ Colonel Powell's opinion was along the 
same line. He declared that he could not find on the 
most diligent inquiry that the council had ever been 
invested with the authorities, rights, and privileges of 
the House of Lords. ^ 

The anger of the council at this proceeding was in- 
tensified by the fact that Lowndes and Powell were 
both members of the assembly, the former being 
speaker. On September 6, they resolved that the 
power of commitment was necessarily incident to each 
house of assembly, that the two justices had been guilty 
of an atrocious contempt of their house, and that a 
copy of these resolutions should be sent to the assembly, 
together with a message stating that they expected 
them to waive the privileges of Lowndes and Powell 
so that the council might take cognizance of their 
offense.^ 

The resolutions and message were laid before the 
commons house on September 8. After looking over 
all the papers in the case, they resolved, by unanimous 
vote, that Powell's commitment was unconstitutional 
and oppressive and a dangerous violation of the liberty 
of the subject, that the speaker and Colonel Powell 
should be, thanked for their able and impartial decisions, 
and the said decisions should be printed for the benefit 

> Com. House Jotirnals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 82-86. 

^ lUd., 86-87. 

^Ihid., 78-79; PuUic Record^, Ms., XXXIII, 345-347. 



392 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of the public; that the message and resolutions of the 
council contained an indecent reflection on the conduct 
of Mr. Speaker and Colonel Powell and a gross insult 
to the assembly ; and that the lieutenant-governor should 
be requested to suspend those members of the council 
who had ordered the commitment of Powell. At the 
same time, the committee of correspondence was or- 
dered to write to the agent in England a full account 
of the council's conduct, and instruct him to lay the 
whole matter before the king and attempt to secure the 
removal of the objectionable councilors.' 

In reply to an address from the house, Lieutenant- 
Governor Bull stated that it would not be proper for 
him to comply with their request to suspend certain 
members of the council, since the dispute had already 
been submitted to the king for settlement, and he would 
doubtless signify his pleasure very soon. The assem- 
bly was adjourned from September 13 to January 11, 
1774.' 

The highest court in the province was soon called 
upon to decide on the council's right to sit as an upper 
house. Printer Powell attempted to bring an action 
against Sir Egerton Leigh, president of the council, 
for false imprisonment. Mr. Edward Rutledge repre- 
sented Powell's interests, and Mr. Simpson, clerk of 
the council, appeared in behalf of Sir Egerton. After 
a full argument on both sides in the court of common 
pleas, Chief Justice Gordon and the four assistant 
judges quashed the suit, declaring in express terms 

' Com. House Journals, Ms.. XXXIX, Part II, 77-88. 
2 Ibid., 93-94, 96, 98. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 393 

that the council was an upper house of assembly and 
hence had the right to commit for contempt/ 

On January 11, His Honor prorogued the assembly 
to March 1. A scheme to liquidate the public debt was 
now adopted, which entirely outwitted the council. The 
assembly began to audit the public accounts and to as- 
certain the sums due to the several public creditors, as if 
they intended to pass a tax bill. Their purpose was 
shown on March 24 by the adoption of a series of reso- 
lutions and orders. It was resolved, that, as the house 
had been prevented by the council for several years 
from providing for the public creditors in the usual 
way, it was their duty to give all possible relief; and 
that this good purpose would be best effected by grant- 
ing interest-bearing certificates to the several persons 
whose accounts had been audited and allowed by the 
house. The clerk of the assembly was ordered to make 
out certificates of the amount due each creditor, together 
with interest until January 1, 1774, and the house 
pledged themselves to insert these sums in the next 
tax bill. The certificates were to be signed by the 
clerk, and, in order to prevent counterfeiting, counter- 
signed by any five of the following members of the 
house: Speaker Lowndes, Christopher Gadsden, Miles 
Brewton, Thomas Heyward, John Izard, Charles Pinck- 
ney, William Cattell, Thomas Bee, and Gideon Du- 
pont, Jr.^ 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXIII, 325-333. Tliese were not the native 
judges appointed by Lieutenant-Governor Bull during the Stamp Act 
controversy, but paid officials from England appointed under the circuit 
court act of 1769. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 162-164. All debts 
contracted before January 1, 1773 were thus provided for. 



394 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

A double purpose was served by tliis plan. Not only 
were the public creditors relieved, but a medium of 
circulation was secured. The members of the assembly, 
who were for the most part wealthy merchants and 
planters, agreed to receive the certificates in all pay- 
ments made to them. Although the people passed it 
from hand to hand "with an eager impatience, almost 
like an hot iron," this species of currency relieved the 
stringency caused by the scarcity of other money. The 
council protested vigorously against the whole proceed- 
ing, but Sir Egerton Leigh and the other placemen did 
not hesitate to accept certificates in payment for their 
services. Lieutenant-Governor Bull alone stood firm. 
Repeatedly urged to accept the amount due him, which 
was more than two thousand pounds sterling, he stead- 
fastly refused. "I shall," he declared in a letter to the 
home government, ' ' always prefer to any private emolu- 
ment, the satisfaction arising in my own mind, from a 
consciousness of performing my duty to the King, and 
of my attachment to the true Interest of this Province 
which this expedient appears to me to have a tendency 
to undermine."^ 

The next important episode in the local history of 
the province was the suspension of William Henry 
Drayton from His Majesty's council. By the terms of 
the circuit court act of 1769, the judiciary of the prov- 
ince was to consist of a chief justice and four assistant 
justices. All were appointed and sent out from Eng- 
land. One of the assistants, Mr. Justice Murray, died 
in January, 1774. As the number of circuits to be 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 36-40. 



DOWNFALL OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 395 

filled required a full bench, it was necessary to appoint 
some one in the colony to serve until the vacancy was 
filled. Although there were a number of lawyers in 
the province, none would accept, because their practice 
was more lucrative and because the size of the circuits 
rendered the position a very arduous one. Finally, 
William Henry Drayton offered his services. In spite 
of his conduct in the Powell case, still fresh in the 
public memory. Bull and his council gladly accepted the 
offer. 

Although not a lawyer by profession, Drayton was a 
man of broad and liberal training, having been edu- 
cated at Balliol College, Oxford.^ He had already 
begun to give trouble to the placemen in the council, 
hence we may reasonably suppose that the unanimity 
of his appointment was due largely to a desire to get 
him away from Charleston as much as possible. Per- 
haps, too, there was some hope of restoring him to his 
old role of defender of the royal prerogative. But if 
the council had any such hopes, they were soon frus- 
trated. Shortly before the meeting of the First Con- 
tinental Congress, he published a pamphlet, entitled, 
''A letter from Freeman of South Carolina to the 
Deputies of North America Assembled in the High 
Court of Congress at Philadelphia," in which with 
graphic language he discussed the grievances of Amer- 
ica and suggested a bill of rights. - 

1 Drayton, Memoirs of the Revolution, I, xiii-xiv; Public Records, 
Ms., XXXIV, 10. 

2Gibbes, Documentary History of the American Revolution (1764- 
1776), 11-39. 



396 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Though his name did not appear in connection with 
the letter, it was well loiown that Drayton was the 
author. His uncle, Lieutenant-Governor Bull, in a 
letter to the Earl of Dartmouth,^ gave him the follow- 
ing review : ^ ' It is replete with sentiments so derogatory 
to the Royal Prerogative and the Authority of Parlia- 
ment, and the long established Constitution of Govern- 
ment in America that it cannot fail to excite indignation, 
while the futility, tautology, and triteness of arguments 
raise contempt. ' ' Bull declared that such conduct war- 
ranted removal from the council, but he had delayed 
taking such a step for two reasons : it would gain for 
Drayton the popularity with the discontented which he 
so much desired, and it would give some foundation for 
the charge that members of the council were denied 
the right of free speech.^ 

Taking up the history of the courts. Freeman called 
attention to their former position, when the assistant 
judges were native Carolinians of wealth and inde- 
pendence serving without pay, and contrasted it with 
the present bench, which was filled with needy place- 
men from England. Chief Justice Gordon and Asso- 
ciate Justice Coslett took offense at this allusion and 
presented a remonstrance to the lieutenant-governor 
urging Drayton's removal from the bench." For the 
next few months, remonstrances, answers, replies, and 

1 Tlie Earl of Dartmouth succeeded Lord Hillsborough in 1772 a3 
colonial secretary of state. 

2 Puhlic Records, Ms., XXXIV, 210-211. 

3 Gibbes, Docmuentary History of the American Revolution (1764- 
1776), 39-41. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVERNMENT 397 

rejoinders followed one another in rapid succession.^ 
The arrival of Judge Grregory early in December with 
His Majesty's mandamus to succeed Murray saved 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull the embarrassment of pass- 
ing upon the ease. Drayton was then absent on the 
northern circuit, which lay through Georgetown, 
Cheraws, and Camden, delivering his famous charges 
to grand juries in defense of the rights of the colonies. 
As soon as he returned, a supersedeas to his commission 
was issued.- 

Drayton's career as a popular agitator was continued. 
Though still members of the council, he and Barnard 
Elliot were both delegates to the provincial congress 
held at Charleston, on January 11, 1775. The final 
breach with the council came about in a manner very 
similar to his first defection at the time of the Powell 
episode. The general duty law and a number of other 
statutes were to expire at the end of this session, but, 
according to custom, the session could not be regarded 
as closed until the first prorogation after some law was 
passed. Thus, by a failure to legislate, these laws had 
been artificially kept in force for two years beyond the 
time when they would ordinarily have expired. The 
assembly, when they met in January, 1775, determined 
to pass some act, it mattered not what, in order to bring 
about the close of the session and hence the expiration 
of the general duty law. There had been no direct tax 
collected in several years, so the government would 

' Gibbes, Documentary History of the American Revolution (1764- 
1776), 41-70. 

^Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 225; Drayton, Memoirs of the Revolu- 
tion, I, 151—152. 



398 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

thus be deprived of all its revenues. Attorney-Greneral 
Leigh, president of the council, would be the chief suf- 
ferer, inasmuch as his salary was paid from this fund. 
Other placemen in the council would also feel its effects 
in the same manner. The assembly hoped in this way 
to force the passage of a duty act, which was a revenue 
bill, without the objectionable clause demanded by the 
additional instruction of April 14, 1770.^ Consequently 
they passed and sent to the council, ' ^ An Act to prevent 
the counterfeiting the paper money of the other colo- 
nies, " the same that had caused so much trouble in the 
Powell case. After postponing consideration of the 
measure for some time on various pretexts, the council 
finally agreed to pass it, as well as a reviving and con- 
tinuing act. The latter continued thirty-seven acts for 
one year and to the end of the next session. The gen- 
eral duty act was continued for one year absolutely, 
and the clause in regard to the treasurer was not in- 
serted.' 

While the crown officials in council were making 
every effort to prevent a vote on the bill to prevent 
counterfeiting, Drayton entered a bitter protest against 
their conduct in the journals. They retaliated, on Feb- 
ruary 11, by voting an address to Lieutenant-Governor 
Bull, requesting his removal, on the general ground that 
he was influenced by a determined effort to destroy the 
confidence of the people in the upper house, to subvert 
the constitution, and to destroy the government. This 

1 Public Records, Ms., XXXV, 7-8. 

Ubid., 61; Statutes, IV, 331-335, 335-336. 



DOWNFALL OF EOYAL GOVERNMENT 399 

was carried by the vote of three placemen, Drayton 
himself being the only South Carolinian present.' 

Two days later, it was presented to the lieutenant- 
governor, and he asked for the facts upon which the 
complaint was founded.^ These were given in a com- 
mittee report, adopted February 22. He had, said they, 
entered captious and frivolous protests against the pro- 
ceedings of the upper house and afterwards caused them 
to be printed in the public newspapers;"^ he had at- 
tempted to bring the house into contempt by boasting 
outside of his malicious attacks upon a certain member 
whom he disliked;* he had both within and without the 
council denied their right to sit as an upper house ; and 
he had in the face of the house declared himself to be 
the author of the Freeman pamphlet. In conclusion, 
they stated that they could not be expected to lay any 
instances of breach of privileges before His Honor, as 
that was a subject of which their house alone was com- 
petent to judge. ^ 

On the adoption of this report, a dissent was entered 
on the journals of the house, signed by John Drayton, 
William Henry Drayton, and Barnard Elliot, the only 
native Carolinians in the council. The report, they 
declared, was unparliamentary^ in almost every line, 

' Gibbes, Documentary History of the American Revolution (1764- 
1776), 70-71; Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 256-257. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 257. 

'Drayton's recent protest had been published in the South Carolina 
Gazette for February 13, 1775, two days after the vote of the council to 
request his suspension. 

* Chief Justice Thomas Knox Gordon. 

5 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 258-260. 



400 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A EOYAL PROVINCE 

but they would confine themselves to two objections. 
In the first place, the council had sent an address to 
the king, September 11, 1773, complaining of a most 
dangerous adjudication that they were not a branch 
01 the legislature/ Had His Majesty really thought 
that they were an upper house, he would certainly in 
the course of sixteen months have made some reply 
and taken steps to preserve them in their rights and 
privileges. His silence was out of tenderness to the 
house, being unwilling to refuse what he could not 
grant. In the second place, if Drayton were removed 
because of the Freeman letter, all confidence in the 
council would be lost. No independent American would 
care to accept a seat in council on a tenure so precarious. ' 
Drayton himself drew up an humble representation 
and sent it to Lieutenant-Governor Bull on February 
27. His defense, he affirmed, turned upon one question, 
''Did His Majesty's Council, sitting in the Council 
Chamber, of themselves form an Upper House of As- 
sembly and a branch of the Legislature?" He took 
the negative side. During the Powell controversy the 
court of common pleas decided that the council was 
an upper house, while another competent tribunal 
adjudged at the same time that it was not. The 
king, though applied to by the council sixteen months 
previously, had not yet declared them to be an upper 
house of assembly, nor had the governor at any time 

1 The decision of Speaker Ix)wndes and Colonel Powell in the printer 
Powell case. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 260-261 ; Gibbes, 
Documentary History of the American Revolution (1764-1776), 75-77. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 401 

ever given them that title. "Thus," said he, "there 
is one express adjudication, and two strongly implied 
opinions of high authority, besides the voice of the 
people, against the claim of the Council, supported only 
by one adjudication." 

Having thus stated the question and given his argu- 
ments in the negative, Drayton went on to show how 
it applied to his own case. The council, while com- 
plaining to the lieutenant-governor of his conduct in 
assembly, had declared that parliamentary offenses were 
subjects of which their house alone was competent to 
judge. If his Honor really regarded the council as an 
upper house, he could not constitutionally call him to 
account for any speech, debate, or proceeding in as- 
sembly. If, on the other hand, he did not allow him 
the privileges of assembly, he would in effect declare 
that the council was not an upper house, and that the 
judgment in Powell vs. Leigh was contrary to law and 
justice.^ 

This ingenious argument did not have any effect on 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull, for, on March 1, Drayton 
was formally suspended from the council until His 
Majesty's pleasure could be known.^ On the 4th, he 
laid all the papers relating to the matter before the 
commons house of assembly, together with a memorial 
filled with complaints of the powers and constitution 
of the council. All were referred to the committee on 
grievances, but no report seems to have ever been made. 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 262-267. 
2/6((Z., 208. 
26 



402" SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Other questions of more importance had begun to oc- 
cupy the attention of the house.' 

The assembly adjourned from March 4 to April 
20. On the 26th they resolved to defray the expenses 
of the government for the year 1774, and ordered a com- 
mittee to bring in a schedule of charges.^ A rumor 
that the newly-appointed governor, Lord William 
Campbell, would soon arrive, led to an adjournment on 
May 1 for one month. They met again on June 1, and 
before sending up the usual notification to His Honor, 
read and approved the estimates for the year 1774, 
and ordered their clerk to grant certificates to the 
various public creditors. They had barely done so, 
w^hen they were summoned to the council chamber and 
adjourned to June 19.' 

Governor Campbell reached Charleston June 17, 
1775, one day after the first meeting of the council of 
safety appointed by the provincial congress.* Meet- 
ings of the assembly continued to be held when a 
quorum could be secured, but very little business was 
attended to, since the council of safety had become the 
real governing body of the province. The assembly 
was formally dissolved on September 15, Governor 
Campbell fled from the town, and royal government in 
South Carolina came to an end.^ 

In the meantime the union movement had been mak- 
ing rapid progress. On March 12, 1773, the Virginia 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 254-269. 

2 Ihid., 276. 
^Ihid., 285-288. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXV, 117; S. Car. His. Soc. Col., II. 22. 
5 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 314. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERXMENT 403 

House of Burgesses adopted those famous resolutions, 
which originated the institution of intercolonial com- 
mittees of correspondence.' The most important of 
these resolutions was the following: 

"Se it Besolved, That a standing Committee of Corre- 
spondence and Enquiry be appointed to consist of eleven 
pei-sons. to wit, The Honorable Peyton Randolph, Esquire, 
Robert Carter Nicholas, Richard Bland, Richard Henrj- Lee, 
Benjamin Harrison, Edmund Pendleton, Patrick Henry, 
Dudley Digges, Dabney Carr, Archibald Cary, and Thomas 
Jefferson, Esquires, any six of whom to be a Committee, 
whose Business it shall be to obtain the most early and au- 
thentic Intelligence of all such Acts and Resolutions of the 
British Parliament, or proceedings of Administration, as 
may relate to or affect the British Colonies in America ; and 
to keep up and maintain a Correspondence and Communica- 
tion with our Sister Colonies, respecting these important Con- 
siderations; and the Result of such their Proceedings from 
Time to Time to lay before this House." 

Another resolution instructed the speaker to transmit 
copies of the resolutions to the speakers of the various 
colonial assemblies, and to desire that they would lay 
them before their respective houses and request them to 
appoint some person or persons to communicate from 
time to time with the Virginia committee.' 

When the South Carolina assembly came together 
on July 8, Speaker Lowndes submitted to them a copy 

^ There had, to be sure, been committees of correspondence in the 
Massachusetts towns several months before this, but Virginia was the 
first to extend the principle to intercolonial relations. 

^Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 25-27; Bancroft, Hist, 
of the United States, Edition, 1878. IV, 258-2.59. For a copy of the 
resolutions, see William ^^'irt, Life of Patricl: Henry, Third Edition, 
87-88. 



404 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

of the Virginia resolutions, together with a letter from 
Speaker Randolph. They approved them unanimously 
and then resolved that the speaker and any eight of 
the other members of the committee of correspondence 
should constitute a committee to correspond with the 
Virginia committee and similar ones in the other 
colonies.^ 

Seeing that there was no disposition on the part of 
the assembly to proceed to business, His Honor pro- 
rogued them from July 8 to August 9. On the third 
day of the new session, a letter was read from the Hon- 
orable Metcalf Bowler, speaker of the Rhode Island 
House of Deputies, dated May 15, 1773, notifying them 
that Rhode Island had, on May 7, appointed a committee 
of correspondence, being led thereto by the resolutions 
from Virginia. Speaker Lowndes was ordered to write 
to the Rhode Island speaker and enclose him a copy 
of the resolutions of July 8. A similar letter was re- 
ceived a few days later from Speaker Gushing of the 
Massachusetts house and its was answered in the same 
manner.^ 

On March 8, 1774, Speaker Lowndes submitted to the 
assembly letters that he had received from the speakers 
of the lower houses in Connecticut, Maryland, and New- 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 25-27. The standing 
committee referred to was one that had long been appointed by the 
house to correspond with the agent in England. They had, up to the 
last few years, acted in conjunction with a committee from the council. 
There were at this time eighteen members, among them being Gadsden, 
Rutledge, Parsons, and the two Pinckneys. See Chapter IV, Colonial 
Agents. 

» Ibid., 30, 34-35, 55-58. 



DOWNFALL OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 405 

castle, Kent, and Sussex-upon-Delaware enclosing 
resolutions providing for committees of correspondence. 
The assembly ordered the speaker to reply to the vari- 
ous letters and enclose their resolutions on the subject, 
and instructed the committee of correspondence to in- 
fonn the other colonial committees of South Carolina's 
grievances relating to the additional instruction from 
the king and the assumed power of the council to com- 
mit for breach of privilege.^ 

The month of September, 1774, witnessed the most 
important step that had yet been taken toward union. 
The First Continental Congress was convened in Phila- 
delphia to consider the Boston Port Bill and other 
colonial grievances. At a meeting of the inhabitants 
of South Carolina held at Charleston, July 6, 7, and 8, 
Heniy Middleton, John Rutledge, Thomas Lynch, 
Christopher Gadsden, and Edward Rutledge were 
chosen to represent the provmce at the congress." 

In the meantime, the assembly had adjourned from 
March 26 to May 3. They were prorogued from time 
to time, and did not meet again for business until August 
2.' Lieutenant-Governor Bull, being well aware that 
they would discuss continental rather than provin- 
cial affairs, decided to prorogue them again as soon 
as they met.* The members of the house, how- 
ever, had some particular business to attend to, and 
were determined to outwit him. The usual time for 

1 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 113. 

mid., 172. 

» Ihid., 170-172. 

* Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 182. 



406 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVIXCE 

their meeting was about ten or eleven o'clock in the 
morning. On this occasion, they met at eight and, m 
accordance with the usual custom, sent two members to 
acquaint His Honor of their meeting. Bull hastened 
to the council chamber, summoned one or two coun- 
cilors, and prorogued the assembly to September 6. 
All this was done in less than twenty minutes, but it 
gave the assembly ample time to carry out their busi- 
ness, which had been carefully planned beforehand. 
Colonel Powell acquainted them of the meetings held on 
July 6, 7, and 8 to elect delegates to the Philadelphia 
congress. They resolved unanimously to ratify the said 
election and to repay with interest any one who would 
advance fifteen hundred pounds sterling to pay the ex- 
penses of the delegates. ^ 

Only a few members were present on September 6, 
and the assembly was continued by various proroga- 
tions until January 24, 1775, when a quorum met for 
business. The journals of the Continental Congress 
were laid before them and they passed resolutions ex- 
pressing their approbation of the proceedings and 
thanking the members in general, and those from South 
Carolina in particular, for their services. As another 
congress was to be held in May, the same five deputies 
were again chosen, and fifteen hundred pounds sterling 
were voted to defray their expenses.^ This election was 
in reality merely a confirmation of a choice made by the 

^Public Records, Ms., XXXIV, 188-189, 193-198; Com. House 
Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 172-174. 

2 Com. House Journals, Ms., XXXIX, Part II, 189-192. 



DOWNFALL OF liOYAL GOVERNMENT 407 

provincial congress, an extra-legal body which met in 
Charleston on January 11.* 

The history of the Second Continental Congress is 
too well known to need repetition. It assumed sovereign 
powers because it had the support of the American peo- 
ple. Common interests and common dangers had 
already molded the thirteen separate colonies into one 
great commonwealth. Armed rebellion now became 
possible, and the idle hopes of a few patriots, such as 
Gadsden and Samuel Adams, were replaced by the 
longings of a nation for its independence. 

* Drayton, Memoirs of the Revolution I, 176; Public Records, Ms., 
XXXV, 5-8. 



APPENDIX 

General Assemblies op the Royal Period 

First July 27, 1721 - June 16, 1724.^ 

Second Feb., 1725 - Nov., 1727.- 

Third Jan. 31, 1728 -May 11, 1728. 

Fourth July 9, 1728 - July 27, 1728. 

Fifth Sept. 17, 1728 -Nov. 23, 1728. 

Sixth Jan. 15, 1729 -Feb. 21, 1729. 

Seventh Aug. 6, 1729 - Oct. 17, 1729. 

Eighth Dec. 2, 1729 - Apr. 29, 1730. 

Ninth Jan. 20, 1731 - Sept. 26, 1733. 

Tenth Nov. 15, 1733 - Sept. 30, 1736. 

Eleventh Nov. 10, 1736 - June 7, 1739.' 

Twelfth Sept. 12, 1739 - Aug. 3, 1742. 

Thirteenth Sept. 14, 1742 - Summer of 1745. 

Fourteenth Sept. 10, 1745 - July 31, 1746. 

Fifteenth Sept. 10, 1746 - July 23, 1747. 

Sixteenth Fall of 1747 - Nov. 19, 1747. 

Seventeenth Jan. 19, 1748 - Summer of 1748. 

Eighteenth Jan. 10, 1749 - Feb. 14, 1749. 

Nineteenth Mar. 28, 1749 - Oct. 4, 1751. 

Twentieth Nov. 14, 1751 - Sept., 1754. 

1 Unless otherwise stated the dates given here are the day named in 
the election writ for the assembly to convene and the day of its dissolu- 
tion. The fifth, seventh, sixteenth and eighteenth assemblies never 
contained a legal quorum, so were dissolved without being organized. 

2 Existence terminated by the death of George I. 

'Date of the last meeting. Dissolved shortly afterwards. 

409 



410 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Twenty-first Nov. 12, 1754 - Aug. 25, 1757. 

Twenty-second Oct. 6, 1757 - Aug. 23, 1760. 

Twenty-third Oct. 6, 1760 - Jan. or Feb., 1761. ' 

Twenty-fourth Mar. 26, 1761 - Dec. 26, 1761. 

Twenty-fifth Feb. 6, 1762 - Sept. 13, 1762. 

Twenty-sixth Oct. 25, 1762 - Sept., 1765. 

Twenty-seventh Oct. 28, 1765 - Sept. 8, 1768. 

Twenty-eighth Oct. 25, 1768 - Nov. 19, 1768. 

Twenty-ninth Mar. 21, 1769 - Nov. 5, 1771. 

Thirtieth Apr. 2, 1772 - Apr. 10, 1772. 

Thirty-first Oct. 8, 1772 - Nov. 10, 1772. 

Thirty-second .Jan. 6, 1773 - Jan. 12, 1773. 

Thirty-third Feb. 23, 1773 - Sept. 15, 1775. 

Colonial Officl\ls op the Royal Period 

Governor 

Francis Nicholson 1721-1725. 

Arthur Middleton 1725-1730.' 

Robert Johnson 1730-1735. 

Thomas Broughton 1735-1737.* 

William Bull 1737-1743.* 

James Glen 1743-1756. 

William Henry Lytti^eton 1756-1760. 

William Bull, The Second 1760-1761.^ 

Thomas Boone 1761-1764. 

William Bull, The Second 1764-1766. 

' Terminated by death of George II. 
" President of the council and acting governor. 
8 Lieutenant-Governor. 

« President of the council (1737-1738), lieutenant-governor (1738- 
1743). 

* Lieutenant-governor. 



APPENDIX 411 

Lord Charles Greville Montagu 1766-1768. 

William Bull, The Second 1768- 

Lord Charles Greville Montagu 1768-1769. 

William Bull, The Second 1769-1771. 

Lord Ch^vrles Greville Montagu 1771-1773. 

William Bull, The Second 1773-1775. 

Lord William Campbell 1775. 

Public Treasurer 

Alexander Parris 1712-1735. 

Gabriel Manigault 1735-1743. 

Jacob Motte 1743-1770. 

Henry Peronneau and Benjamin Dart . 1771-1776.'' 

Powder Receiver 

Miles Brewton 1717-1745. 

Robert Brewton 1745-1759. 

Jacob Motte, Jr 1759-1760. 

James Reid 1760-1776. 

Secretary of the Province 

Charles Hart 1716( ?)-1732. 

John Hammerton 1732-1762. 

Thomas Skottowe 1762-1775. 

Commissary General 

Peter Taylor 1735-1737. 

John Dart 1737-1755. 

'Bull's third administration (1768) extended over the summer 
months while Governor Montagu was in the northern colonies. 

* Assistant Treasurer Peronneau performed the duties of the oflSce 
during the interval between Motte's death and his own election. 



412 SOUTH CAKOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

William Pinckney 1755-1766. 

Benjamin Simons 1766-1771. 

George Sheed 1771-1776, 

Provost Marshal 
Patentees. 

Thomas Lowndes and Hugh Watson. . .1725-1759.^ 

Richard Cumberland 1759-1772.' 

Duties of office exercised by deputies. 

William Loughton 1721-1725. 

George Bamppield 1725-1733, 

Robert Hall 1733-1740. 

William Williamson 1740-1742. 

Samuel Hurst 1742-1745. 

Rawlins Lowndes 1745-1754. 

Charles Lowndes , . 1754-1758. 

Adam Wood 1758-1760. 

Daniel Doylet 1760-1764. 

Roger Pinckney 1764-1772. 

Attorney-General 

Benjamin Whitaker 1721-1731. 

James Abercrombie 1731-1732. 

Charles Pinckney 1732-1733. 

James Abercrombie 1733-1742. 

James Wright 1742-1757. 

David Graeme 1757-1764. 

James Moultrie 1764. 

1 Lowndes and Watson received a commission for life from the pro- 
prietors in 1725 and one from the king in 1730. Watson died in 1759. 
Mention is made in the journals of George Morley as patentee (1745). 
He had probably purchased the Lowndes interests. 

2 Cumberland's interests were purchased by the province in 1767. 
His deputy still exercised the duties of the office until the circuit court 
act was put into force in 1772. 



APPENDIX 413 

John Rutledge 1764-1765. 

Sir Egerton Leigh 1765-1774. 

James Simpson 1774-1775. 

Surveyor-General of Lands 

James St. John 1731-1743. 

George Hunter 1743-1756( ?). 

Egerton Leigh 1756( ?)-1772. 

James Simpson 1772. 

Egerton Leigh 1772-1775. 

Receiver-General of the Quit Rents 

John Hammerton 1732-1742.^ 

George Saxby 1742-1774. 

Thomas Irving 1774-1775. 

Cliief Justice 

Francis Yonge 1721. 

Charles Hill 1721-1724. 

Thomas Hepworth 1724—1727. 

Richard Allein 1727-1731. 

Robert Wright 1731-1739. 

Benjamin Whitaker 1739-1749. 

James Graeme 1749-1752. 

Charles Pinckney 1752-1753. 

Peter Leigh 1753-1759. 

James Michie 1759-1761. 

William Simpson 1761-1762, 

Charles Skinner 1762-1767." 

Thomas Knox Gordon 1771-1775. 

5 Hammerton was the first receiver-general appointed after the crown 
had purchased the proprietary interests in 1729. 

2 The office was vacant from Skinner's suspension in 1767 to Gordon's 
appointment in 1771. Judicial business was attended to by the assist- 
ant justices. William Wragg was offered the chief justiceship in 1769 
and again in 1770, but he refused to accept. 



414 SOUTPI CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Judge of the Court of Vice -Admiralty 

James Smith 1721-1724( ?). 

William Blakeway 1724-1727. 

Benjamin Whitaker 1727-1732. 

William Trewin 1732.' 

Benjamin Whitaker 1732-1736. 

Maurice Lewis 1736-1739. 

William Trewin 1739-1741. 

James Graeme 1742-1752. 

James Michie 1752-1758. 

Peter Leigh 1758.'' 

James Michie 1752-1758. 

John Rattray 1760-1761. 

Egerton Leigh 1761-1768. 

James Michie 1758-1760. 

Sir Augustus Johnson 1769.'' 

Edward Savage 1771-1775( ?). 

Speaker of the Assembly 

James Moore 1721-1724. 

Thomas Hepworth 1724.' 

Thomas Broughton 1725-1727. 

Thomas Fenwicke 1727.^ 

WiLLAM Dry 1728-1729. 

John Lloyd 1730-1731, 

1 Deputy under Whitaker. 

* Deputy under Michie. 

3 After the reorganization of the admiralty in 1768 Johnson was 
appointed judge for the southern district. He authorized Simpson to 
act in his absence. The new plan seems to have failed, for in 1771 
Savage received a commission from Lieutenant-Governor Bull as provin- 
cial judge. How long he served is uncertain. 

* From March 23 to June 16. 
5 AuEcust 29 to November. 



APPENDIX 415 

William Dunning 1731.' 

John Lloyd 1731-1732. 

Robert Hume 1732-1733. 

Paul Jenys 1733-1736. 

Charles Pinckney 1736-1740. 

WiLiAM Bull, Junior 1740-1742. 

Benjamin Whitakeb 1742-1744. 

WiLiAM Bull, Junior 1744-1747. 

Henry Middleton 1747.^ 

WiLiAM Bull, Junior 1748-1749. 

Andrew Rutledge 1749-1752. 

James Michie 1752-1754. 

Henry Middleton 1754-1755. 

Benjamin Smith 1755-1763. 

Rawlins Lowndes 1763-1765. 

Peter Manigault 1765-1772. 

Rawlins Lowndes 1772-1775. 

Colonial Agent 

Abel Kettleby 1712-1716. 

Joseph Boone and Richard Berespord. .1715-1716. 

Joseph Boone 1716-1720. 

Rowland Tryon 1720.' 

Francis Yonge and John Lloyd 1721-1722. 

Francis Yonge 1722-1727. ^- 

Samuel Wragg 1727-1728. 

Stephen Godin 1729.* 

1 July 7 to November 17. 

* January 27 to July 23. 

3 Mentioned as co-agent with Boone. Com. House Journals, Ms., V, 
433-434. 

* Tliere was no regular agent from 1728 to 1731. Godin represented 
the council in the paper money controversy. 



416 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Peregrine Fury 1731-1749. 

Francis Yonge 1733.' 

John Fenwicke 1744-1745.^ 

James Crokatt 1749-1757. 

James Wright 1757-1760.' 

Charles Garth 1762-1775. 

Superintendent of Indian Affairs 

Edmund Atkin 1756-1762. 

John Stuart 1762-1776. 

' Sent to cooperate with the regular agent in urging some particular 
measure. There were many examples of such special agencies. 
2 The office was vacant from 1760 to 1762. 



LIST OF AUTHORITIES QUOTED. 

Admiralty Court Records, 1716-1763. Manuscript 3 vols. Office of 
the Clerk of the United States District Court, Charleston. 

American Historical Review. 

Bancroft, George. History of the United States. 6 vols. Boston, 
1S78. 

Barry, John S. The History of Massachusetts. 3 vols. Boston, 1855- 
1857. 

Bishop, Joel P. New Criminal Procedure. Fourth Edition. 2 vols. 
Chicago, 1895-1896. 

Blackstone. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Edited by 
George Sharswood. 2 vols. Philadelphia. 1860. 

Brownell, Charles. The Indian Races of North and South America. 
New York, 1853. 

Carroll, B. R. Historical Collections of South Carolina. 2 vols. 
New York, 1836. 

Chalmers, George. Opinions of Eminent Lawyers on Various Points 
of English Jurisprudence, chiefly concerning the Colonies, Fish- 
eries, and Commerce of Great Britain. Cited as Colonial Opin- 
ions, Burlington, 1858. 

CH.4.RLEST0N YeAR BoOKS. 

CoxE, Brinton. An Essay on Judicial Power and Unconstitutional 
Legislation. Philadelphia, 1893. 

Commons House Journals. Manuscript. 39 vols. Office of Secretary 
of State, Columbia. 

Council Journals. Manuscript. 38 vols. Office of Secretary of State, 
Columbia. 

Dictionary of National Biography. 

Drayton, John. Memoirs of the American Revolution. 2 vols. Charles- 
ton, 1821. 

Forsyth, William. Cases and Opinions on Constitutional Law. Lon- 
don, 1869. 

GiBBES, R. W. Documentary History of the American Revolution. 3 
vols. Columbia, 1853, and New York, 1857. 
27 417 



418 SOUTH CAROLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Greene, Evarts B. The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies 

of North America. Harvard Historical Studies. Vol. VII. New 

York, 1898. 
Harris, Thaddeus M. Biographical Memorials of James Oglethorpe. 

Boston, 1841. 
Hewatt, Rev. Alexander. An Historical Account of the Rise and 

Progress of the Colonies of South Carolina and Georgia. 2 vols. 

London, 1779. Tliis is reprinted in Carroll's Collections, vol. I. 
HuGHSON, Shirley C. Carolina Pirates and Colonial Commerce. Johns 

Hopkins University Studies. Vol. XII. Baltimore, 1894. 
Johnson Manuscripts. Documentary History of New York, vol. II. 

Albany, 1850. 
Jones, Charles C. The History of Georgia. 2 vols. Boston, 1883. 
Kerby, D. M. An Historical Sketch of the Equitable Jurisdiction of 

the Court of Chancery. Cambridge, 1890. 
Landrum, J. B. O. Colonial and Revolutionary History of Upper South 

Carolina. Greenville (S. C), 1897. 
Lecky, W. E. H. a History of England in the Eighteenth Century. 

Second Edition. 8 vols. London, 1883. 
McCrady, Edward, The History of South Carolina under the Pro- 
prietary Government (1670-1719). New York, 1897. 
The History of South Carolina under the Royal Grov- 

ernment (1719-1776). New York, 1899. 
Maitland, F. W. Justice and Police. London, 1885. 
Maryland Archives. Correspondence of Governor Sharpe. 3 vols. 

Baltimore, 1888-1895. 
Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings. First Series, vol. 

XVII. Boston, 1880. 
Mereness, N. D. Maryland as a Proprietary Province. New York, 1901, 
Miixs, Robert. Statistical Atlas. Manuscript. Office of the Secretary 

of State, Columbia. 
New Jersey Archives. First Series, vols. II, IX. Newark, 1881, 1885. 
New York Colonial Documents. Vols. VI, VII, IX. Albany, 1855- 

1856. 
New York, Documentary History of. 4 vols. Albany, 1850-1851. 
Nisi Prius Reports, 3 Campbell, 97. New York, 1821. 

1 Ryan and Moody, 166. London, 1827. 

North Carolina Colonial Records. 10 vols. Raleigh, 1886-1890. 
Oglethorpe Letters. Collections of the Georgia Historical Society. 

Vol. III. Savannah, 1873. 



AUTHOEITIES 419 

Osgood, Herbert L. The Colonial Corporation. Political Science 
Quarterly. Vol. XI. 1896. 

The Proprietary Province as a form of Colonial Gov- 
ernment. American Historical Review. Vols. II, III, 1896-1898. 

Palfrey, J. G. History of New England. 5 vols. Boston, 1890-1897. 

Parliamentary History of England. Cobbett and Hansard. Vol. 
XVI. London, 1813. 

Pennsylvania Archives. Edited by Samuel Hazard. Vol. IV. Phila- 
delphia, 1853. 

Political Science Quarterly. 

Prince Society Publications. Randolph Papers. Part XVI, 5 vols. 
Boston, 1898-1899. 

Public Records. Manuscript. 36 vols. Office of the Secretary of 
State. Columbia. 

Public Records, Extra. ]\lanuscript. 4 vols.^ 

Quit Rents. Manuscript. Office of the Secretary of State. Columbia. 

Ramsay, David. The History of South Carolina. 2 vols. Charleston, 
1809. 

Ramsey, J. G. M. The Annals of Tennessee. Charleston, 1853. 

Rivers, W. J. A Sketch of the History of South Carolina to the close 
of the Proprietary Government, 1719. Charleston, 1856. 

ScHAPER, William A. Sectionalism and Representation in South Caro- 
lina. Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 
1900. Vol. I, 237-463. Washington, 1901. 

Shaftesbury Papers. South Carolina Historical Society Collections. 
Vol. V. Charleston, 1897. 

Sound Currency. Vol. V, No. 4. New York, February 15, 1898. 

South Carolina Gazette. 1732-1775. 

South Carolina Historical Society Collections. 5 vols. Charles- 
ton, 1857, 1858, 1859, 1887, 1897. 

Spence, George. The Equitable Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery. 
2 vols. London, 1846-1849. 

Statutes at Large of South Carolina. 

a. Tliomas Cooper and David J. McCord. 10 vols. Columbia, 1836- 
1841. 

b. John F. Grimke. 1 vol. Philadelphia, 1790. 
Statutes at Large (of England and Great Britain). 

* These extra volumes contain portions of the council and assembly 
journals copied in the British Public Record Office to fill the gapsj in the 
journals at Columbia. 



420 SOUTH CAEOLINA AS A ROYAL PROVINCE 

Tannek, Edwin P. Colonial Agencies in England during the Eighteenth 
Century. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. XVI, 1901. 

Wallace, D. D. Constitutional History of South Carolina from 1725 
to 1775. Abbeville (S. C), 1899. 

Washbubn, Emoby. Sketches of the Judicial History of Massachusetts. 
Boston, 1840. 

Whitney, Edson L. Government of the Colony of South Carolina. 
Johns Hopkins University Studies. Vol. XIII. Baltimore, 18!)->. 

WiBT, William. Sketches of the Life of Patrick Henry. Third Edi- 
tion. Philadelphia, 1818. 



INDEX. 



Abbeville county, 187, 212. 

Aberciombie, James, goes to Eng- 
land to solicit service of inde- 
pendent troops, 193; attorney- 
general, 412. 

Adams, Samuel, 407. 

Additional instruction of April 14, 
1770, dispute over, 170, 373-387. 
See Wilkes fund controversy. 

Admiralty coui-t, 84, 147-156, see 
table of contents; records dis- 
cussed, 150. 

Ad valorem duties, 285-286. 

Agent in England, 158-170, see 
table of contents; instructed to 
protest against the Townshend 
acts, 361; mentioned, 392; list 
of agents, 415-416. 

Akin, James, elected to the as- 
sembly (1725), governor refuses 
to administer the state oaths, 
98-99. 

Allein, Richard, chief justice, 123, 
413; member of the committee 
of correspondence, 162; dispute 
with the assembly in the Land- 
grave Smith case, 251, 261-262; 
elected to the assembly, 267. 

Allen, Andrew, member committee 
of correspondence, 162. 

Allen, Eleazar, clerk of the assem- 
bly, 114; puisne baron of the 
court of exchequer, 156. 

Altamaha Fort. See Fort King 
George. 

Amherst, General, sends officer to 
train the artillery company in 
Charleston, 178. 

Amory, Jonathan, advocate in the 
court of vice-admiralty, 148. 

Amy, Thomas, cacique, 35. 



Amyand, Isaac, clerk of the as- 
sembly, 114. 

Andros, Edmund, landgrave, 34. 

Archdale, John, governor, settles 
quit rent dispute, 8, 29-31 ; 
fortifies Charleston, 196. 

Artillery company established in 
Charleston, 177-178. 

Ash, John, agent of the dissenters 
in England, 159. 

Ashley River Ferry Town in 
Berkeley county, 85. 

Ashley's bastion, location of, 197. 

Assembly, 95-117, see table of con- 
tents; power of appointing 
public officials, 15-20; usurps 
control over expenditure of 
money, 220, 305, 370-386, see 
table of contents; encroaches on 
the governor's military powers, 
220-222 ; imprisons merchants 
of Charleston for petitioning 
against a legal tender bill, 237- 
239; passes resolutions criticis- 
ing President Middleton and the 
council, 349; declares that the 
right of representation is con- 
stitutional, not statutory, 343- 
345; denies the force of royal 
instructions, 309, 374, see Wilkes 
fund controversy; powers of as- 
sembly and council compared. 
332, 388; assembly attacks 
council's right to sit as a legis- 
lative body, 387-393; votes to 
defray expense of delegates to 
the Continental Congresses, 406; 
list of general assemblies, 409- 
410. 

Atkin, Edmund, member of the 
council, 315; superintendent of 



421 



422 



INDEX 



Indian affairs for the southern 
district (1756-1762), 224, 416. 

Attorneys-General, list of, 412- 
413. 

Axtell, David, landgrave, 34. 

Bampfield, George, deputy provost 
marshal, 412. 

Barbadoes, concessions, 4; settlers 
from, 6, 172; Barbadian in- 
fluence, 11, 171. 

Barnwell county, 184. 

Barnwell, Colonel John, member 
of the committee of correspond- 
ence, 162; constructs Fort King 
George, 209. 

Barry, Thomas, 155. 

Bayley, John, dispute over elec- 
tion of as clerk of the assembly, 
111-114. 

Beale, Othniel, colonel of infantry, 
178; superintends building of 
fortifications, 199, 204-206; 
sent as commissioner to Georgia, 
218-219; candidate for public 
ti'easurer, 312; elected to the 
assembly, 316. 

Beaufort county, 184. 

Beaufort galley, 188-189, 191-192. 

Beaufort judicial district created, 
135, 141. 

Beaufort, Port Royal, court es- 
tablished at, 146; assembly 
meets at, 381-383. 

Bee, John, dissenter, refuses to 
take the oath on the Evangelists, 
99. 

Bee, Thomas, member of the as- 
sembly, 342, 385, 393; attorney 
in the case of Jordan versus 
Law, 354. 

Beresford, Richard, colonial agent, 
160-161, 415; member of the 
committee of correspondence, 
162. 

Berkeley county, created, 6 ; di- 
vided into parishes, 10, 11; men- 
tioned, 7, 9, 56, 120, 145-146, 
174. 



Bernard, Gabriel, engineer, super- 
intends building of fortifica- 
tions, 198-199. 

Bill of Rights Society, founded in 
London to pay the debts of 
John Wilkes, 370. 

Bills of credit, 230-275, see table 
of contents; issued to build 
court houses and gaols, 140; 
amount of at various times, 257, 
274. 

Bishop of London, encroachments 
upon the jurisdiction of, 10. 

Blake, Daniel, member of the coun- 
cil, 389. 

Blake, Joseph, deputy governor, 8, 
196; colonel of cavalry, 173. 

Blake's bastion, location of, 196. 

Blakeway, William, fails in his 
candidacy for powder receiver, 
18-19; member of the committee 
of correspondence, 162; judge of 
vice-admiralty, 414. 

Bland, Richard, member of the 
Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Board of Trade, reports adversely 
on the church act of 1704, 11; 
refuses to assist the colony 
during the Yemassee War, 12; 
interferes in the land contro- 
versy, 36; recommends repeal of 
election law of 1745, 117; re- 
ports adversely on the circuit 
court act of 1768, 136; favors 
act of 1769, 138; criticises In- 
dian trade act, 216-217; recom- 
mends repeal of currency acts 
of 1721 and 1723, 240; drafts 
commission and instructions of 
Governor Johnson, 268; recom- 
mends repeal of statute impos- 
ing difl^erential duties, 286; re- 
commends payment of salary of 
Chief Justice Wright, 299. 

Bohun, Edmund, chief justice, 121. 

Boone, Joseph, sent to England as 
agent of the dissenters, 10, 159: 
agent to deal with the pro- 
prietors, 160-161, 415; dispute 



INDEX 



428 



over payment of salaiy of, 289- 
291. 

Boone, Thomas, appointed gover- 
nor, 337 ; arrives in the prov- 
ince, 339 ; administration, 339- 
347; dispute with the assembly 
over the Gadsden case, 340-347, 
see table of contents; sails for 
England, 347 ; assembly with- 
holds salary of, 76, 347-349; 
mentioned, 79, 170. 

Bosher, captain of rangers, 186. 

Bouquet, Lieutenant-Colonel, com- 
mander of Royal American 
troops, 207. 

Bowler, Metcalf, speaker of the 
Rhode Island House of Deputies, 
404. 

Braddock, David Cutler, captain 
of the Beaufort galley, 190-191. 

Braddock, General, 133, 223. 

Brahm. See De Brahm. 

Braithwaite, John, member of the 
council, 315. 

Brewton, Colonel Michael or Miles, 
powder receiver, 19-20, 411. 

Brewton, Miles, son of above, 
member of assembly, 393. 

Brewion, Robert, member of the 
assembly, 310; powder receiver, 
411. 

British troops in Charleston, dis- 
pute over furnishing of supplies, 
358-359. See Independent Com- 
panies. 

Broughton's battery erected, 198- 
199, 205. 

Broughton, Thomas, speaker of 
the assembly, 414; argument to 
justify the control of the as- 
sembly over money bills, 294 ; 
member of the council, 271 ; 
lieutenant governor, 271; act- 
ing governor, 298 ; character, 
298; administration, 298-306; 
death, 306; mentioned, 50, 77, 
130. 

Brown, captain of rangers, 186. 

Brown, John, messenger of the 
assembly, 266. 



Bruce, Captain, engineer, plans 
Charleston fortifications, 199- 
201. 

Bull, Stephen, assistant justice of 
Berkeley county (1683), 120. 

Bull, Stephen, elected to the as- 
sembly (1745), 316. 

Bull, William, Indian commis- 
sioner, 215; member of the coun- 
cil, 271; president of the coun- 
cil and acting governor, 74, 
306; commissioned as lieutenant 
governor, 306 ; administration, 
306-313; mentioned, 58, 61, 62, 
77-78. 

Bull, William (the second), speak- 
er of the assembly. 111, 316, 
415; member of the council, 
337 ; attends Indian conference 
at Albany, 222 note; lieutenant- 
governor and acting governor, 
337 ; character, S37 ; first ad- 
ministration, 337-339 ; second 
administration, 347-356; third 
administration, 358, 361 ; fourth 
administration, 366-379, fifth 
administration, 385-402, 402- 
407, see table of contents; men- 
tioned, 52, 115, 128, 141, 157, 
182, 410-411. 

Burns, John, member of the coun- 
cil, 389. 

Caciques, 26; list of, 34-35. 

Calhoun, John C, 187 note. 

Calhoun, Patrick, captain of 
rangers, 187. 

Camden, judicial district created, 
135, 141; mentioned, 397. 

Campbell, Dougal, clerk of the 
common law courts, defeats at- 
tempt to use unstamped paper 
in the courts, 354-355; Lieuten- 
ant-Governor Bull refuses to 
suspend him, 355; fined, 356. 

Campbell, Lord William, ap- 
pointed governor, 385; arrives 
in the province, 402 ; adminis- 
tration, 402; instructions, date 
and number, 79. 



424 



INDEX 



Carey, Thomas, register of the 
court of vice-admiralty, 148. 

Carolina, ship of war, 189. 

Carr, Dabney, member of the Vir- 
ginia committee of correspond- 
ence, 403. 

Carter, John, agent of Virginia 
in England, complains of South 
Carolina's Indian legislation. 
216. 

Carteret, James, landgrave, 34. 

Carteret, Lord John, refuses to 
sell territorial interest in the 
Carolinas, 32. 

Carteret's bastion, location of, 197. 

Cary, Archibald, member of the 
Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Castle Pinckney, 201. 

Catawba Indians, location, mili- 
tary strength of, 213; attend 
conference at Albany, 222 note; 
mentioned, 184. 

Cattell, William, Jr., member of 
the assembly, 393; mentioned. 
313. 

Cavalry, 173. 

Certificates of indebtedness, issued 
by the assembly, 393. 

Chancery, Court of, 119-120, 123. 

Charles II., grants territory of 
Carolina, 3. 

Charleston, founded. 6, 196; loca- 
tion of in 1680/ 196; political 
and social center, 6, 12; judicial 
center, 120, 133, 146-147; forti- 
fications of, 196-208, see table 
of contents; judicial district 
created, 135, 141; galley, 188- 
189, 191-192. 

Charlotte, Fort. See Forts. 

Charter of 1629, 3; of 1603, 3, 
provisions in regard to land 
grants, 25; of 1665, 3, 25; char- 
ter appealed to in confirmation 
of the rights of representation, 
345. 

Cheraws, judicial district created, 
135, 141; mentioned, 397. 



Cherokee Indians, location, mili- 
tary strength, 213; war with, 
172, 186, 211, 3.38; mentioned, 
210, 216. 

Chester county, 184. 

Chickasaw Indians, location of, 
213. 

Chicken, Colonel George, commis- 
sioner of Indian affairs, 215, 
218. 

Chief Justices, list of during pro- 
prietary period, 121 ; during the 
royal period, 413; tenure, 333; 
salary, 334. See Trott, Allein, 
Wright, Whitaker, Skinner, etc. 

Chisolme, Major, commander of 
royal troops in Charleston, 
asks for supplies, 358. 

Choctaw Indians, location, 213. 

Christ Church parish, inhabitants 
petition for increase of paper 
currency, 250; mentioned. 146. 

Church of England, law passed re- 
quiring members of assembly to 
conform to, 9; established by 
law, 10; laws opposed by the 
dissenters, 10-11; disallowed in 
England, 11; church finally es- 
tablished 11; patronage, 21. 

Circuit courts, 133-141. See table 
of contents. 

Classification of colonial govern- 
ments, 1. 

Clerk of the assembly, dispute over 
election of, 111-115. 

Coast defenses, 196-208. See 
table of contents. 

Coins, English little used. 229; 
Spanish, Mexican, and Peruvian 
brought in, 230; value fixed by 
statute, 230; amount of in the 
province, 231. See Proclama- 
tion money. 

Cole and Beale galley, forfeited 
for violating acts of trade and 
navigation, 154. 

Colleton county, original location, 
6; mentioned. 7, 9, 56, 141, 146, 
174. 



INDEX 



425 



Colleton, James, governor, land- 
grave, 34. 

Colleton, Sir John, member of the 
council, 315; elected to the as- 
sembly, 346. 

Colleton, Thomas, landgrave, 34; 
mentioned, 4. 

Colleton's bastion, location of, 197. 

Colonial agent, 158-170, see table 
of contents; list of agents, 415- 
416. 

Colonial Lake, mentioned, 201. 

Columbia, mentioned, 208. 

Commissaries General, list of, 411- 
412. 

Commissions and instructions, 78- 
79. See Instructions. 

Committees of correspondence, in 
the Massachusetts towns, 403 
note; Virginia Burgesses sug- 
gest inter-colonial committees, 
403; South Carolina approves 
the plan and authorizes agency 
committee to act, 403-404; 
Rhode Island deputies appoint 
committee, 404 ; Connecticut, 
404; Delaware, 404-405; men- 
tioned, 159, 162 note, 170, 392. 

Commons house of assembly. See 
Assembly. 

Common law, adopted by statute 
(1712), 121. 

Common law courts, 120-133, see 
table of contents; judges 
(1683), 120, (1721), 123, 
(1734), 129, (1765), 131, 
353-354; chief justices, 121, 
413. 

Common pleas, Court of, 121-131. 
See table of contents. 

Conant, Richard, assistant justice 
of Berkeley county (1683), 120. 

Concessions, Barbadoes ( 1663, 
1665), 3. 

Congarees. See Forts. 

Connecticut assembly appoints 
committee of correspondence, 
404. 

Conscience, Courts of, attempt to 
establish, 142-143. 



Conseiller's bastion, 20.5-206. 

Constitution, colonial, resemblance 
to British constitution, 90-91, 
289; in 1760, 330-336; change in 
character after 1760, 330; two 
conflicting theories of, 375-377. 

Continental Congresses, 40.5-406. 

Cooke, Sir John, opinion on the 
jurisdiction of admiralty courts, 
154. 

Cooper, Dr. Thomas, opposes 
scheme of the land speculators, 
43; imprisoned, denied privileges 
of writ of habeas cor pus, 43; 
released, 44 ; elected to the as- 
sembly, 44 ; appointed puisne 
baron of the court of exchequer, 
156; mentioned, 105, 129. 

Coroner, 145. 

Cosby, Governor of New York, 92. 

Coslett, Charles Matthews, ap- 
pointed assistant justice, 139; 
urges removal of William 
Henry Drayton from the bench, 
396. 

Council, executive, 85-88; legisla- 
tive, 90-95; judicial, 118-120, 
see table of contents ; origin, 
4-5, 89; separated from the as- 
sembly, 7, 89; triple character 
of, 91-92, 94-95; confused ideas 
in regard to its position, 289 ; 
salary of officials, 95; powers of 
in 1760, 332-333; change in 
character after 1760, 87, 234-' 
235, 331 ; opposes paper money 
schemes of the assembly, 234 
seq.; right to sit as an upper 
house of the legislature ques- 
tioned, 325-327, 387-393, 400- 
401, see William Henry Dray- 
ton; list of members of (1730). 
271, (1743), 315, (1773), .389. 

Council of Safety, supersedes the 
provincial government, 402. 

Counsel permitted in criminal 
cases, comparison with English 
custom, 128. 

Counterfeiting, dispute ever bill 
to prevent, 388-393, 398. 



426 



INDEX 



Counties, three original, 6. 

Courts, 118-157, see table of con- 
tents; suggestion that courts 
pass upon the constitutionality 
of laws, 132. 

Court houses built, 140-141. 

Craven county, 6, 7, 9, 56, 141, 
145, 174. 

Craven's bastion, location of 196- 
197; mentioned, 200, 205. 

Creek Indians, location, military 
strength of, 213; expedition 
against proposed, 260; uprising 
in Georgia, 187: invade the 
back country, 346 ; mentioned, 
216. 

Croft, Childermas, commissioner 
of Indian affairs. 218. 

Crokatt, James, colony agent in 
England, 165, 416; dispute be- 
tween council and assembly over 
resignation of, 165-169, 321- 
322, 382-333; removed to Lon- 
don, 315; named as council or 
in Glen's commission, 315. 

Crosskeys, John, 18. 

Cumberland, Richard, dramatist, 
provost marshal, 134, 412; sells 
his patent, 134. 

Cushing, Thomas, speaker of the 
Massachusetts House of Repre- 
sentatives, 361, 364, 404. 

Dale, Tliomas, assistant justice, 
129. 

Dalton, Joseph, register of lands, 
28 note. 

Daniel, Robert, assistant justice of 
Berkeley coimty (1683), 120. 

Daniel, Robert deputy governor, 
161, 183. 

Darby, Michael, dissenter, re- 
fuses to take oath on the Evan- 
gelists, 99. 

Dart, Benjamin, member of the 
assembly, 349, 362, 369; elected 
public treasurer, 377 note, 411; 
refused to advance money on the 
order of the assembly, 379-380; 



assembly attempted to procure 
his arrest, 380. 

Dart, John, commissary general, 
411. 

Dartmouth, Earl of, secretary of 
state for the colonies, 52, 182, 
396 and note. 

De Brahm, William Gerald, en- 
gineer, superintends construc- 
tion of fortifications, 203-204, 
206-207. 

Debt, public, provision made for 
payment (1731), 272. 

De Grey, William, British at- 
torney-general, report on the 
Wilkes fund controversy dis- 
cussing control of assembly over 
the pviblic treasury, 372-373. 

Delaware (Newcastle, Kent, and 
Sussex) assembly appoints com- 
mittee of correspondence, 404- 
405. 

Differential duties. See Protec- 
tion. 

Digges, Dudley, member of the 
Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Dissenters, Protestant, religious 
privileges of, 3 ; dispute with 
the church party, 9-1 1 ; mem- 
bers of assembly required to 
take an oath on the Evangelists, 
99-100; attempt to remove dis- 
abilities of, 115-116. 

Dorchester, Berkeley county, fair 
and market established, 85; 
mentioned, 189. 

Doyley, Daniel, assistant justice, 
131, 354; deputy provost mar- 
shal, 412. 

Drake, William, commissioner of 
Indian affairs, 218. 

Drayton, John, member of the 
council, 389 ; joins his son in 
protesting against the actions 
of the council, 389, 399^00. 
See William Henry Drayton. 

Drayton, Thomas, member of the 
assembly, 316. 

Drayton, William Henry, elected 



INDEX 



427 



to the assembly, 350; opposes 
the non-importation agreement, 
369 ; appointed member of the 
council, 389 ; protests against 
postponement of the bill to pre- 
vent counterfeiting, 389; publi- 
cation of protest leads to dis- 
pute involving the right of the 
council to sit as a branch of the 
legislature, 389-393 ; appointed 
assistant justice, 395; writes 
the Freeman pamphlet, 396; at- 
tempt to secure his removal 
from the bench, 396-397; 
superseded by Judge Gregory, 
397; delegate to the Provincial 
Congress (1775), 397; protests 
against further efforts of the 
council to block legislation, 
398 ; placemen request his sus- 
pension from the council, 398- 
399; defense, 399-401; suspen- 
sion, 401. 

Dry Savannah, mass meeting 
called at during riots of 1727, 
248. 

Dry, William, assistant justice, 
123; commissioner to stamp 
bills of credit, 240; commander 
of Goose Creek militia, 248; 
member and speaker of the as- 
sembly, 256, 262, 267, 414. 

Dunning, William, speaker of the 
assembly, 415. 

Dupont, Gideon, Jr., member of 
the assembly, 393. 

Dutarque, Louis, 146. 

Dynamics, financial, meaning of, 
228-229; dynamics of the 
monetary system, 235, seq.; of 
the revenue system, 289-329. 
See table of contents. 

Echaw, 145. 

Election laws, 9.5-100, 107-108, 
115-117, see table of contents; 
assembly complains of violation 
of law of 1721, 249, 365; dis- 
pute over election law in the 
Gadsden case, 340-347. 



Elliot, Barnard, member of the 
council, 389 ; joins in defending 
William Henry Drayton against 
the placemen in the council, 
399-400; delegate to the Pro- 
vincial Congress, 397. 

Error, Court of, 118-119. 

Estimates of public expenses, 
made by assembly alone after 
1735, 302. 

Eveleigh, Samuel, assistant justice, 
123; member of the assembly, 
242, 316. 

Exchange, mediums of, 229 ; rata 
of between sterling and currency, 
231, 233, 234, 274, 279; between 
sterling and proclamation 
money, 230, 274, 279. 

Exchequer, court of, 51, 156-157. 

Executive, 73-88, see table of con- 
tents; weakness of, 334-336; 
list of executive offices. 88 ; 
officials, 410-413. 

Export duties, 285. 

Fairchild, John, captain of rang- 
ers, 184-186. 

Fairfield county, 184. 

Fane, Francis, special counsel for 
colonial affairs, report on the 
quit rent act of 1744, 68-69. 

Fees, 21, 77, 288. 

Fenwicke, John, assistant justice, 
123; member of the council, 271, 
315; colonial agent, 416. 

Fenwicke, Thomas, speaker of the 
assembly, 414. 

Ferguson, Thomas, member of the 
assembly, 343, 369. 

Fewtrell, John, assistant justice, 
139. 

Financial history, 228-329. See 
table of contents. 

Fitch, Tobias, commissioner of 
Indian affairs, 218. 

Flamhorough, ship of war, 189. 

Fortifications, 196-208, see table 
of contents; fortification fund, 
378 note. 



428 



INDEX 



Forts, 208-212. See Frontier De- 
fenses, table of contents. 
Charlotte, erected, 212. 
Congarees, erected, 208; In- 
dian trading post, 214. 
Frederick, erected, 210; men- 
tioned, 193, 194, 202, 211. 
Johnson, erected, 197; inde- 
pendent troops stationed at, 
194; damaged by storm of 
1752, 206; stamped paper 
stored in, 352; mentioned, 
193, 200, 202, 208, 388. 
King George, erected, 192, 
209; destroyed by fire, 193, 
209, 244 ; unsuccessful at- 
tempt to have it rebuilt, 
210. 
Loudon, erected, 211; destroy- 
ed, 211. 
Lyttleton, erected, 211. 
Moore, erected, 208 ; rebuilt, 
210; independent troops 
stationed at. 194; Indian 
trading post, 214; men- 
tioned, 141. 
Pallachochola Old Town, 
erected, 209 ; Indian trad- 
ing post, 215 note. 
Prince George, erected, 210- 
211. 
Francis, James, captain of rang- 
ers, 184-186. 
Frankland, Captain, of the war 

ship Rose, 191. 
Frederick, Fort. See Forts. 
Freeman, pamphlet written by 
William Henry Drayton, 395- 
390. 
French, intrigue with the Indians, 
184; ei-ect a chain of forts from 
Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, 
193; French and Indian War 
mentioned, 168, causes increase 
in issue of public orders, 275, 
277, causes increase of taxation, 
283; importance of overthrow 
of French power in America, 
330-331. 



Frontier defenses, 208-212. See 
table of contents, also Forts. 

Fundamental Constitutions, is- 
sued, 4; dispute over refusal of 
the people to subscribe to, 7; 
provisions relating to the land 
system, 26, 34; tend to foster a 
slave-holding aristocracy, 171. 

Fury, Peregrine, agent in Eng- 
land, 68, 164-165, 416; defends 
assembly for withholding salai'y 
of the chief justice, 299. 

Gadsden, Christopher, disputed 
election case, 340-347, see table 
of contents; opposes payment 
of Governor Boone's salary, 347; 
member of committee to con- 
sider circuit court act, 138; 
delegate to Stamp Act Con- 
gress, 350; represents the radi- 
cal patriot party, 357 ; defends 
non-importation agreement, 369 ; 
chairman of committee on 
grievances, makes report con- 
demning the removal of the as- 
sembly to Beaufort, 383 ; mem- 
ber of the committee of corre- 
spondence, 404 note; delegate to 
the Continental Congresses, 405- 
406; mentioned, 170, 351, 362, 
385, 393, 407. 

Gadsden, Thomas, collector of the 
customs, 154. 

Gage, General, letter to Earl of 
Halifax relating to independent 
troops, 195; letter to Governor 
Montagu, 358. 

Gaillard, Tacitus, member of the 
assembly, 138. 

Galleys, Charleston and Beaufort, 
188-189, 191-192. 

Gaols built, 140-141. 

Garth, Charles, agent in England, 
169-170, 416; purchases Cum- 
berland's rights to the office of 
provost marshal, 134. 

General duty act, 287, 307-308; 
dispute over renewal of, 398. 



INDEX 



429 



General sessions, Court of, 121- 
131. See table of contents. 

George I, death of, 256. 

George III, accession of, an epoch 
in the history of Great Britain 
and the colonies, 330. 

Georg-etown. judicial district 
created, 135, 141; mentioned, 
397. 

Georgia, dispute with South Caro- 
lina over the subject of Indian 
trade, 218-219; assisted by 
South Carolina in the war with 
the Spanish, 189-190, 199, 277; 
detachment of independent 
troops sent to, 193. 

Gibbes, John, cacique, 35. 

Gibbes, Robert, sheriff, 120; chief 
justice. 121. 

Gibson, Roger, captain of rangers, 
185. 

Glen, James, appointed governor, 
314; arrives in the province, 
92-93, 315; administration, 314- 
324 ; dispute with the council 
over his right to participate in 
their legislative sessions, 93-94; 
disputes with the assembly over 
appointment of fortification 
commissioners, 202-204, over 
Indian affairs, 221-222, over is- 
sue of paper money, 275-276, 
over a tax bill, 318-319; refuses 
request of the assembly to dis- 
regard the legislative council, 
387 ; letter to the Duke of Bed- 
ford discussing the colonial 
constitution (1748), 81-82, 107- 
108, 334-336; mentioned, 67, 
77, 79, 111, 117, 125, 165, 166, 
168, 210, 323-324. 

Godin, Stephen, agent of the coun- 
cil in England, 164, 269, 415. 

Gold coins. See Coins and Proc- 
lamation money. 

Gordon, Thomas Knox, chief 
justice, 138, 399, 413; member 
of the council, 389 ; decision in 
the Powell case affirming the 
right of the council to sit as 



an upper house of the legisla- 
ture, 392-393; urges the re- 
moval of William Henry Dray- 
ton from the bench, 392-393, 
from the council, 399. 

Government, 71-407. See table 
of contents. 

Governor, 73-85, see table of eon- 
tents; excluded from the legis- 
lative council, 306; claims right 
to be present. 323; weakness 
of, 334-336 ; list of governors 
of the royal period, 410-411. 

Graeme, David, attorney at law, 
104; attorney-general, 412. 

Graeme, James, elected to assem- 
bly from Port Royal, 47 ; chief 
justice, 413; judge of vice-ad- 
miralty, 414. 

Graham, James, attorney at law, 
154. 

Grand council, 4-5. See Council. 

Grand jury, power to initiate 
legislation, 7 ; of Charleston, 
complains of rent roll bill of 
1741, 59-60, finds fault with 
the militia, 182, condemns the 
Beaufort galley, 192. 

Grant, Colonel James, leads expe- 
dition against the Cherokees, 
186, 338. 

Granville county, 56, 141, 146, 174, 
183. 

Granville, Lord, palatine, favors 
the church party, 10. 

Granville's bastion, location of, 
196; mentioned, 205. 

Gray, William, dispute over his 
election as captain of rangers, 
185-186. 

Great Britain, similarity of con- 
stitutional development in 
South Carolina and, 228. 

Green, Daniel, assistant justice, 
goes to England, 129; puisne 
baron of the court of exchequer, 
150. 



430 



INDEX 



Gregory, assistant justice, super- 
sedes William Henry Drayton, 
397. 

Grey, William De. See De Grey. 

Grinnan, captain of rangers, 186. 

Habeas Corpus, privileges of the 
writ refused to opponents of 
the land speculators, 43-45, to 
Landgrave Smith, 250. 

Haldimand, Brigadier-General, in 
command of regular troops at 
St. Augustine, 359. 

Halifax, vice-admiralty court 
opened at, 149. 

Halifax, Earl of, 195. 

Half Moon (at Broad Street), 205. 

Hall, Robert, deputy provost mar- 
shal, 412. 

Hammerton, John, secretary of the 
province, 60-61, 304, 411; re- 
ceiver-general of the quit rents, 
60-61, 413; member of the 
council, 271, 315; sent as com- 
missioner to Georgia, 219. 

Hamor, Captain, of the ship 
Flamiorough, 189. 

Hampton county mentioned, 184. 

Hardy, Charles, captain of His 
Majesty's ship the Rye, 189, 190. 

Hargrave, Henry, deputy secre- 
tary of the province and clerk 
of the council, 266. 

Harrison, Benjamin, member of 
the Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Hart, Charles, secretary of the 
province, 411. 

Eaiok, sloop of war, 189. 

Heath, Sir Robert, grant of Caro- 
lina to, 3. 

Henry, Patrick^ member of the 
Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Hepworth, Thomas, member of the 
committee of correspondence, 
162; chief justice, 413; speaker 
of the assembly, 414; men- 
tioned, 240. 



Herbert, Jolin, commissioner of 
Indian affairs, 215, 218. 

Hesse, Captain, engineer, sent to 
Charleston by Lord Loudon to 
superintend the construction of 
the fortifications, 207. 

Heyward, Thomas, member of the 
assembly, 393. 

Hill, Charles, assistant justice, 
123; chief justice, 413: men- 
tioned, 162. 

Hillsborough, Earl of, secretary 
of state for the colonies, 115, 
128, 140, 152, 362, 370, 372, 380, 
381, 382, 388. 

Hodgson, Robert, captain of inde- 
pendent troops, 194-195 note. 

Hodgson, William, decision in case 
of, involving titles to land, 36. 

Hog Island Creek, 200, 201. 

Horry, Elias, elected to the as- 
sembly, 316. 

Horsey, Samuel, appointed gov- 
ernor, 314; death, 314. 

Howard, Thomas, powder receiver, 
17. 

Howser, Henry, 240. 

Hudson, Robert. See Hodgson. 

Huguenots, 6, 9. 

Hume, Robert, speaker of the as- 
sembly, 299, 415; mentioned, 
154. 

Hunt, captain of rangers, 186. 

Hunter, George, surveyor-general 
of lands, 185, 413. 

Hurricane of 1752, 204-206. 

Hurst, Samuel, deputy provost 
marshal, 412. 

Import duties, 285, 287 ; amount 
of in 1725, 1746, 1747, and 1748, 
287. 

Independent companies, 192-195; 
stationed at Fort King George, 
209, 220, 244; mentioned, 184. 

Indian relations, 212-227. See 
table of contents. See also 
Catawba s, Cherokees, Choctaws, 
Chickasaws, and Creeks. 



INDEX 



431 



Infantry. See Militia. 

Initiation of legislation, by the 
grand council, 5; by the grand 
juries, 7; by the assembly, 8, 
89; assembly claims sole right, 
20-21 ; council rarely initiates 
legislation, 332. 

Instructions to the governor, a 
part of the written constitution, 
78-79; validity of denied, 309, 
326; methods of interpretation, 
375-376; dispute over refusal 
of assembly to accept the ad- 
ditional instruction of April 14, 
1770, 373-386, see Wilkes fund 
controversy. 

Intercolonial wars, importance of 
in the development of colonial 
union, 331. 

Irving, Thomas, receiver-general 
of the quit lents, 413. 

Izard, John, member of the as- 
sembly, 393. 

Izard, Ralph, member of the coun- 
cil, 254, 271; member of the 
committee of correspondence, 
162. 

James' Island, 197. 

Jefferson, Thomas, member of the 
Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Jenys, Paul, member and speaker 
of the assembly, 267, 415. 

John's Island, 146 note. 

Johnson, Sir Augustus, judge of 
vice-admiralty, 149-150, 414. 

Johnson, Fort. See Forts. 

Johnson, Colonel Guy, superin- 
tendent of Indian affairs, 224. 

Johnson, Sir Nathaniel, governor, 
favors church party, 9-11; dis- 
pute with assembly over the ap- 
pointment of the public treas- 
urer, 15-17; decision of crown 
officials affecting land grant to, 
36; mentioned, 196. 

Johnson, Robert, proprietary gov- 
ernor, deposed as a result of the 
revolution of 1719, 13-14; dis- 



pute with the assembly over the 
appointment of a powder re- 
ceiver, 18-20; lieutenant-general 
of militia, 174; supersedes 
Nicholson as royal governor, 
268; submits to Board of Trade 
plan for settling the currency 
question, 270; arrives in the 
province, 36, 112, 271; adminis- 
tration, 36-48, 268-274, 295, 
298; interested in land specula- 
tions, 41, 50; dispute with the 
assembly over the election of a 
clerk, 112-114; death, 298; 
mentioned, 76, 77, 79, 129. 

Johnson's covered half-moon, loca- 
tion of, 197. 

Johnson, Sir William, superin- 
tendent of Indian affairs for 
the northern district, 222-224, 
227; death, 224. 

Johnson, William, artisan, repre- 
sents the radical patriot party, 
357. 

Johnston, governor of North Caro- 
lina, 67. 

Jones, John, popular leader in the 
riots of 1727, 247. 

Jordan versus Law, test case in- 
volving the use of unstamped 
paper in the courts, 354. 

Judges, see Judiciary and Com- 
mon Law Courts ; list of chief 
justices, 121, 413; list of vice- 
admiralty judges, 414. 

Judiciary, 118-157, see table of 
contents; dependent on the 
crown after 1735, 333-334. 

Jury Act of 1731, 126-127, 157. 

Justices of the peace, 141-142. 

Kettleby, Abel, landgrave, agent 
in England, 159-161, 415. 

Kershaw, Joseph, member of the 
assembly, 138. 

King George Fort. See Forts. 

Kinlock, James^ member of the 
council, 271, 315. 

Kirle, Sir Richard, landgrave, 35. 



432 



INDEX 



Lamb, Matthew, special counsel 
to the Board of Trade, 125, 143 
note; reports adversely on the 
circuit court act of 1768, 136. 

Lamboll, Thomas, assistant justice, 
129. 

Land bank established, 232-233. 

Landgraves, 26; list of, 34-35. 

Land system, 25-70. See table 
of contents. 

Laurens, Henry, member of the 
assembly, 350, 362. 

Lee, Richard Henry, member of 
the Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Legal tenders, 230-275. See 
table of contents. 

Legislative procedure, 255, 292- 
294, 311-312. 

Legislature, 89-117. See table 
of contents. 

Leigh, Sir Egerton, attorney-gen- 
eral, surveyor-general of lands, 
and judge of vice-admiralty, 
413-414; member and president 
of the council, 389-390; argues 
against use of unstamped paper 
in the courts, 354; sued by 
Thomas Powell for false im- 
prisonment, 392; accepts certi- 
ficates of indebtedness issued 
by the assembly, 394. 

Leigh, Peter, chief justice, 413. 

Lewis, Charles, dissenter, refuses 
to take oath on the Evangelists, 
99. 

Lewis, Maurice, elected to the as- 
sembly, 301 ; judge of vice-ad- 
miralty, 414. 

Livingstone, William, goes to Eng- 
land to solicit the service of 
independent troops, 193. 

Lloyd, Caleb, stamp distributor, 
retires to Fort Johnson for 
safety, 352; agrees not to at- 
tempt to dispose of stamps, 352. 

Lloyd, John, agent in England, 
161-163, 415; speaker of the 
assembly, 267, 271, 414-415; 
mentioned, 242, 253. 



Locke, John, landgrave, 34. 

Logan, George, public receiver, 
dispute over appointment, 15- 
17. 

Long Canes settlement, protected 
by rangers, 187. 

Lords, House of, adopts resolu- 
tions condemning the action of 
Massachusetts in opposing the 
Townshend Acts, 366. 

Lords Justices in Council, repeal 
the currency acts of 1721 and 
1723, 240. 

Loudon, Fort. See Forts. 

Ijoudon, Lord, 207. 

Loughton, William, deputy pro- 
vost marshal, 412. 

Lower courts, 141-147. See table 
of contents. 

Lowndes, Charles, deputy provost 
marshal, 412. 

Lowndes, Rawlins, member and 
speaker of the assembly, 342, 
345, 384-386, 415; member of 
committee on privileges and 
elections in the Gadsden case, 
343; assistant justice, 131, 354; 
opinion in the printer Powell 
case denying the right of the 
council to sit as a branch of the 
legislature, 390-391; deputy 
provost marshal, 412; men- 
tioned, 138, 349, 350, 393, 403, 
404. 

Lowndes, Thomas, purchases Price 
baronies, 35; provost marshal, 
412. 

Lyford, captain of the Charleston 
galley, 191 

Lynch, Thomas, dissenter, refuses 
to take oath on the Evangelists, 
99. 

Lynch, Thomas, member of the as- 
sembly, mentioned, 138, 348, 
362, ^369; delegate to Stamp 
Act Congress, 350; delegate to 
First Continental Congress, 405. 

Lyttleton, Fort. See Forts. 



INDEX 



433 



Lyttleton, William Henry, gover- 
nor arrives in the province, 325; 
administration, 325-327, trans- 
ferred to the Jamaica govern- 
ment, 337; mentioned, 7U, 182, 
207. 

McCulloh, Henry, royal land com- 
missioner, attempts to put an 
end to land frauds, 48-51; at- 
tempts to secure a better collec- 
tion of the quit rents, 57-09 ; 
objections to the quit rent act 
of 1744, 66-07. 

McMahan, William, dissenter, re- 
fuses to take oath on the Evan- 
gelists, 99. 

McNeal, captain of rangers, 186. 

McPherson, captain of rangers, 
185. 

Manigault, Gabriel, public treas- 
urer, 414; resigns, 61, 312-313; 
elected to the assembly, 316. 

Manigault, Peter, speaker of the 
assembly, 350, 361, 364, 382, 
415; resigns, 384 note; replies 
to Massachusetts circular letter 
of 1768, 361; submits Massa- 
chusetts and Virginia letters to 
the assembly, 362; signs war- 
rant for the arrest of the public 
treasurers, 380; mentioned, 343, 
349, 354. 

Manwaring versus ^achevercll, 45. 

Marque and reprisal, letters of, 
15.5-156. 

Marston, Rev. Edward, rector of 
St. Philip's, Charleston, opposes 
the extreme church party, 10. 

Maryland assembly, appoints com- 
mittee of correspondence, 404. 

Massachusetts House of Piepresen- 
tatives, proposes intercolonial 
congress to protest against the 
Stamp Act, 350; sends circular 
letter criticising the Townshend 
Acts, 3.59-300, approved by Vir- 
ginia House of Burgesses, 360- 
361, by the South Carolina as- 

28 



sembly, 362-363, ordered print- 
ed, 364; mentioned, 137. 

Mazyck, Isaac, elected to the as- 
sembly, 301, 316. 

Merchants of Charleston, im- 
prisoned for petitioning against 
the issue of paper money, 236- 
239. 

Jlerchants of London trading with 
South Carolina, petition for set- 
tlement of currency question, 
269-270. 

Michie, James, chief justice, 413; 
judge of vice-admiralty, 414; 
speaker of the assembly, 415. 

Middleton, Arthur, president of 
the council and acting governor, 
administration, 241-268, 291- 
295, see table of contents; con- 
troversy over payment of salary, 
46, 273; dispute with assembly 
over the election of a clerk, 111- 
112; mentioned, 74, 76, 99, 154, 
162, 272; death, 306. 

Middleton, Edward, assistant 
justice of Berkeley county, 120. 

Middleton, Henry, speaker of the 
assembly, 111, 415; delegates to 
the First Continental Congress, 
405. 

Middleton, William, elected agent 
to England, refuses to serve, 
169. 

Militia, 171-182. See table of 
contents. 

Minnick, Christian, captain of 
rangers, 185. 

Monetary system, 229-278. See 
table of contents. 

Money bills, 280-329, see table of 
contents; dispute over agent's 
salary, 165-169. 

Monke, John, cacique, 35. 

Montague, Lord Charles Greville, 
arrives in Charleston, 348, 
357; administration, 357-366; 
379-385; instructed to secure 
payment of Governor Boone's 
salary, 348; suspends Chief 
Justice Skinner from office, 



434 



INDEX 



357; spends summer (1768) in 
the northern colonies, 361; 
sails for England, 366; returns 
to the province, 379 ; refuses to 
approve Speaker Lowndes, 111, 
385; again sails for England, 
385; mentioned, 79, 137-138. 

Montgomery, Colonel Archibald, 
leads expedition against the 
Cherokees, 186, 338. 

Moore, Fort. See Forts. 

Moore. James, governor, 9 ; chief 
justice, 121. 

Moore, James (the second), rev- 
olutionary governor, 14; lieu- 
tenant-general of militia, 174; 
speaker of the assembly, 414; 
commissioner of Indian affairs, 
217-218; death, 218. 

Morton, Joseph, landgrave, 34; 
governor, 29, 120; judge of the 
court of vice-admiralty, 148. 

Motte, Jacob, appointed public 
treasurer, 312-313; ordered by 
the assembly to advance money 
to the Wilkes fund, 369; dis- 
pute over attempt to reimburse 
him and his estate, 371-386; 
death. 374. 

Motte, Jacob, Junior, powder re- 
ceiver, 411. 

Moultrie, James, attorney-general, 
412. 

Moultrie, William, dispute with 
Governor Boone, 346; men- 
tioned, 349. 

Murrav, John, assistant justice, 
139 ; death, 394. 

Nairne, Tliomas, Indian agent, 
214. 

Naval stores, mentioned. 159, 163. 

Navigation Acts. See Trade and 
Navigation Acts. 

Navy, 187-192. 

Nicholas, Robert Carter, member 
of the Virginia committee of 
correspondence, 403. 

Nicholson, Francis, governor, ar- 
rives in the province, 123, 234; 



character and training, 234; ad- 
ministration, 234-241, 289-291; 
dispute with commons over 
duration of general assembly, 
108-110; brings over company 
of independent troops, 192; re- 
turns to England, 241 ; men- 
tioned, 14, 46, 75, 79, 98-99, 
125, 209. 

Ninety-Six, mentioned, 184; judi- 
cial district created, 135, 141. 
' Negroes, special court for the trial 
of, 143-145. See Slaves. 

Nelson, Pascal, captain of inde- 
pendent troops, 194. 

Newberry county, 184. 

Newcastle, Duke of, 43, 69, 70. 
73, 75, 156, 164. 

New England, influence of on the 
other colonies, 110, 345, 351. 
361-362; takes lead in the 
Stamp Act controversy, 349- 
350 ; comparison of colonial 
constitutions in New England 
and the south, 376-377. 

New Windsor. See Fort Moore. 

Non-importation agreement form- 
ed, 368-369. 

North Carolina, members of as- 
sembly paid in, 115; South 
Carolina attempts to make it a 
dependency, 163. 

Northey, Attorney-General, opin- 
ion on the jurisdiction of ad- 
miralty courts, 154. 

Northumberland, Earl of, ap- 
pointed vice-admiral of America, 
149. 

Officials, list of in appendix, 410- 
416; crown officials usually sent 
from England, 235, 331. 

Oglethorpe, General James, 190, 
219. 

Oliphant, Doctor David, member 
of assembly, 343. 

Orangeburg, judicial district 
created, 135. 141. 

Ordinary, Court of, 119. 



INDEX 



435 



O'Sullivan, Florence, surveyor- 
general, 28 note. 
Owen, William, popular leader, 5. 

Pallachocola Old Town. See 
Forts. 

Parishes, established (1704-1706), 
10-11; made basis of represen- 
tation in the assembly, 11, 12, 
96; list of (1721), 100; num- 
ber (1770), 100. 

Parris, Alexander, assistant 
justice, 123; public treasurer, 
411; mentioned, 15-16. 

Parsons, James, member of the 
assembly, mentioned, 349, 351, 
362, 369, 385; presents popular 
petition urging the use of un- 
stamped paper, 354 ; member 
of the committee of correspond- 
ence, 404 note. 

Patrol system, 179-181. 

Pearson, John, sent to survey 
North Carolina boundary, 185; 
captain of rangers, 186. 

Pendleton, Edmund, member of 
the Virginia committee of corre- 
spondence, 403. 

Pension system, 176. 

Peronneau, Henry, elected public 
treasurer, 377 note; refuses to 
advance money on the order of 
the assembly, 379-380. 

Phillips, Richard, captain in com- 
mand of battalion from the 
Royal American Regiment, 195. 

Pilkington et al. versus Snow 
Vrow Aletta cmd Cargo, 156. 

Pinckney, Charles, son of Thomas, 
member of the assembly and 
speaker, 301, 311, 415; reports 
resolutions defending the con- 
trol of the assembly over money 
bills, 296-297; sent as commis- 
sioner to Georgia (1736), 219; 
mc-mber of the council, favors 
the removal of the civil dis- 
abilities of dissenters, 116; at- 



torney-general, 412, chie-f- 
justice, 413; mentioned, 154, 
166. 

Pinckney, Charles, son of William, 
member of the assembly, men- 
tioned, 343, 349, 350, 351, 354, 
362, 385, 393; member of the 
committee of correspondence, 
404 note. 

Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth; 
member of assembly, 385; mem- 
ber of the committee of corre- 
spondence, 404 note. 

Pinckney, Roger, deputy provost 
marshal, 134, 412; sheriff of 
Charleston district, 390. 

Pinckney, William, master in 
chancery, deputy secretary of 
the province, 95; commissioner 
of Indian affairs, 218; elected 
to the assembly, 316; commis- 
sary general, 412. 

Piracy, 150-152. 

Placemen, fill best offices in the 
province, 139. 

Plan of book, 2. 

Planters, grievances of, 258-259. 

Police of Charlestojki. See Watch. 

Pollinger, R., marshal in the court 
of vice-admiralty, 148. 

Population, character of, ; in- 
crease of, 6. 

Porter, Captain Matthew, powder 
receiver, 18. 

Port Royal, settlement at (1670), 
4; mentioned, 163, 187, 192- 
193, 208-209. 

Powder receiver, dispute over ap- 
pointment of, 17-20; list of 
powder receivers, 411. 

Powell, George Gabriel, member 
of the assembly, 138, 385 ; opin- 
ion in the printer Powell case, 
391. 

Powell, Thomas, editor of the 
Gazette, publishes the Drayton 
protest, 389-390; arrested, 390; 
trial involves the right of the 
council to sit as a branch of the 
legislature, 390-393. 



436 



INDEX 



Powell versus Leigh, 392-393. 

Pownall, Thomas, appointed gov- 
ernor, but does not come to the 
province, 337. 

Price, John, landgrave, 35. 

Prince George. See Forts. 

Pringle, Robert, assistant justice. 
131, 353. 

Privateers, 155-156. 

Privileges, of the assembly, 104- 
105, 236-239, 303-305: "of the 
council, 91. 

Prize cases, 156. 

Proclamation money. 239 and 
note. See Statutes, Proclama- 
tion. 

Produce made legal tender, 229- 
230. 

Proprietary period (1670-1719), 
1-33. See table of contents. 

Protection, to ship-building indiis- 
try, 285-286 ; law repealed on 
complaint of British merchants 
and ship-builders. 286 ; system 
of bounties, 287. 

Protestant, dissenters, see dis- 
senters; settlers given public 
assistance, 272. 

Provincial navy, 187-192; dispute 
over re-organization of, 319. 

Provost marshal, opposes at- 
tempts to establish courts in the 
upper country, 134 ; sells inter- 
ests, 135; list of provost mar- 
shals, 412. 

Public orders, 272, 275-277. See 
table of contents. 

Public Records, extra volumes of, 
256 note. 

Public Treasurer. See Treasurer. 

Quia Emptores, statute of inoper- 
ative, 3, 25. 

Quit rents, 28-31, 54-70, see 
table of contents; quit rent act 
of 1731, 37-48, 272; mentioned, 
7, 269. 

Quo Warranto, writ of, 77. 

Ramon, Don Pedro, 154. 



Randolph, Edward, 148, 341. 

Randolph, Colonel Peter, surveyor- 
general of customs, suggests 
method of ending the Stamp Act 
embargo, 352-353. 

Randolph, Peyton, speaker of the 
Virginia House of Burgesses, 
364 ; member of the committee 
of correspondence, 403 ; men- 
tioned, 367, 404. 

Rangers, 182-187. 

Rattray, John, judge of vice-ad- 
miralty, 414. 

Rebellion, growth of the spirit of, 
386-402. See table of con- 

tents. 

Receivers-General of the quit 
rents, list of, 413. 

Receiver, Public. See Treasurer. 

Regulators, organized to preserve 
order in the upper country, 133, 
137. 

Reid, James, powder receiver, 411. 

Religious disputes, 9-11. 

Revenues, 279-329. See table of 
contents. 

Revolution of 1719, 13-14. 

Rhett, William, surveyor and 
comptroller of the customs, 
complaints against, 163; men- 
tioned, 12. 

Rhett, William (the second), 
member committee on the cur- 
rency, 242, 253; reports, 257. 

Rhode Island, House of Deputies 
appoints committee of corre- 
spondence, 404. 

Rice bills, 234, 236. 

Riots of 1727, 246-249. 

Rose, ship of war, 191. 

Rothmaller, Job, 47. 

Rowe, Major Thomas, cacique, 35. 

Royal American Regiment, 195. 

Royal troops. See Independent 
companies. 

Rnsco versjts French, 39. 

Russel, captain of rangers. 186. 

Rutledge, Andrew, member and 
speaker of the assemblv, 301, 
316, 415. 



INDEX 



437 



Rutledge, Edward, represents the j 
plaintiti' in I'oircll versus Leigh, 
392; delegate to the Continental 
Congresses, 405-406. 

Rutledge, John, brother of Ed- 
ward, chairman of committee on 
privileges and elections, 343 ; 
reports on the Gadsden case, 
343; delegate to the Stamp 
Act Congress, 350-351 ; elected 
to the last general assembly of 
the colonial period, 385; mem- 
ber of the committee of corre- 
spondence, 404 note; delegate 
to the Continental Congresses, 
405-406; attorney-general, 413; 
mentioned, 138, 354, 362, 369. 

Ryder, attorney-general of Great 
Britain, 33. 

Rye, ship of war, 189. 

St. Andrew's parish, 100. 

/S'<. Antonio, ship forfeited for 
violating acts of trade and 
navigation, 154. 

St. Augustine, expedition against 
(1702), 9, 174, Spanish at en- 
courage slaves to run away, 307 ; 
mentioned, 187, 189, 190. 

St. Bartholomew's parish, inhabit- 
ants petition for increase of 
paper currency, 250; mentioned, 
100. 

St. Dennis's parish, 100, 146, 250. 

St. George's parish, 100, 145. 

St. Helena's parish, 100. 

St. James's Goose Creek, 100, 145; 
militia company takes lead in 
the riots of 1727, 248. 

St. James's Santee, 100, 145, 250. 

St. John, James, surveyor-general 
of lands, 38, 413; arrives in the 
province, 38 ; opposes the 
schemes of the land speculators 
38-47; mentioned, 69. 

St. John's parish, 100, 145, 250. 

St. Paul's parish, 100, 250. 

St. Philip's parish, Charleston, 10, 
100, 175. 

St. Simon's island, 190. 



St. Thomas's parish, 100, 146, 250. 

Salaries, regulated by statute, 80; 
salary of the chief executivej 
74-78; disputes over the pay- 
ment of President Middleton's 
salary, 273, 295; Governor 
Boone's, 347-349; Chief Justice 
Wright's, 45-46, 295-302 ; 
salaries of the clerks of the as- 
sembly and the council, dispute 
over, 290; salary of colonial 
agent, 159, 160-164, dispute 
over payment, 160-161, 166- 
168, 289. 

Savage, Edward, assistant justice, 
139; judge of vice-admiralty, 
414. 

Savannah, headquarters for In- 
dian trade, 219. 

Savanna Town (Fort Moore), 208. 

Saxby, George, receiver general 
of the quit rents, 61, 67, 413; 
elected to the assembly, 316; 
stamp distributor, retires to 
Fort Johnson for safety, 352. 

Savle, William, governor, 4, 5, 26, 
28. 

Scire facias, writ of, 11; not is- 
sued by the court of chancery in 
South Carolina, 120. 

Scotch-Irish, 133, 171. 

Scout boats, 187-188. 

Scouts. See Rangers. 

Scovilites, opponents of the Regu- 
lators, 137. 

Scrivener, William, popular leader, 
5. 

Seabrooke, Captain, member of 
the assembly, 109. 

Seckendorf, Count, 203. 

Secretaries of the province, list of, 
411. 

Sharpe, John, 165. 

Sheed, George, commissary gen- 
eral, 412. 

Shelburne, Earl of, 170. 

Shelton, Richard, secretary to the 
lords proprietors, 299. 

Ships of war, royal, in the colony 
(1742), 189-190. 



438 



INDEX 



Simmond, Captain, member of the 
assembly, 109. 

Simons, Benjamin, commissary 
general, 412. 

Simpson, James, clerk of the coun- 
cil, 392; attorney-general, 413; 
surveyor-general of lands, 413; 
judge of vice-admiralty, 414. 

Simpson, William, chief justice, 
413. 

Silver. See Coins and Proclama- 
tion money. 

Sinking fund act (1724), 241; 
suspended for seven years, 270. 

Skene, Alexander, member of the 
council, 247, 249, 271, 315. 

Skinner, Charles, chief justice, re- 
fuses to use unstamped paper in 
the courts, 353; overruled by 
assistant justices, 354; dissent- 
ing opinion, 354; forced to cele- 
brate repeal of the Stamp Act, 
355; removed from office, 356- 
357; mentioned, 131, 170, 413. 

Skottowe, Thomas, member of the 
council, 389; secretary of the 
province, 411. 
'Slaves, special courts for trial of, 
143-145; enticed by Spanish to 
escape to St. Augustine, 171 
employed as troops, 175-178 
outnumber the whites, 179 
basis of taxation, 282; tax on 
slave trade, 285 note, 287. See' 
Patrol system. 

Smith, Benjamin, assistant justice, 
131, 354; speaker of the assem- 
bly, 338-339, 342, 415; men- 
tioned, 345. 

Simith, Captain George, public 
treasurer, 17. 

Smith George (the second), mem- 
ber of the assembly, 253. 

Smith, James, judge of vice-ad- 
miralty, 414. 

Smith, John, cacique, 35. 

Smith, Captain Richard, member 
of the assembly, 104. 

Smith, Landgrave Thomas, gov- 
ernor, 8. 



Smith, Landgrave Thomas, son of 
preceding, member of the coun- 
cil, takes popular side in the 
riots of 1727, 248; imprisoned, 
refused privileges of the writ 
of habeas corpus, 248, 250, 261- 
262. 
Smith, Thomas, son of preceding, 
member of assembly, leads the 
popular party in the riots of 
1727, 247; re-elected to the as- 
sembly, 267. 
Smith, William, powder receiver, 

18 note. 
Somerville, Tweedie, 156. 
Spanish at St. Augustine, en- 
courage slaves to run away, 
171; wars with, 171-172, 188- 
191, 198-199; evacuate Florida, 
importance of, 331. 
Speaker of the assembly, 110-111; 

list of speakers, 414-415. 
Spry, William, appointed admir- 
alty judge for America, 149. 
Stamp Act controversy, 349-357. 

See table of contents. 
State oaths for members of as- 
sembly, administered by the 
governor, 98 ; disputes over, 98- 
100, 340-347; final settlement, 
349. 
Statics, financial, meaning of 228- 
229; statics of the monetary 
system, 229 seq. ; of the revenue 
system, 279-288. 
Statutes (of England and Great 
Britain ) , one hundred and 
sixty-seven adopted into the 
province (1712), 121-122. 
Quia Emptores, suspended, 3, 

25, 28. 
Acts against piracv Henry 
VIII, chap. 15 and 11 and 
12 William III, chap. 7, 
mentioned, 1.50, 152. 
Act of 7 and 8 William III, 
chap. 22, for punishing vio- 
lations of the navigation 
acts, 153. 



INDEX 



439 



Trade and Navigation Acts, 

148, 153-154. 
Proclamation statute (1707), 
230, 278-279; attempts of 
the assembly to violate, 
253-254, 257-259, 321. 
Act of 1729 puchasing the 
territorial interests of the 
proprietors, 14, 32, 268. 
Act of 1751 forbidding New 
England colonies to issue 
bills of credit, 275; extend- 
ed to other colonies (1764), 
275. 
Stamp Act (1765), 76, 349- 
357. See table of contents. 
Townshend Acts, 358. 
Act 35 Henry VIII, chap. 2 
concerning treason, 366. 
Stobo, James, dissenter, refuses to 
take oath on the Evangelists, 
99. 
Stono insurrection, 50, 106 note, 

144, 172, 181, 187, 307. 
Storm of 1752, 204-206. 
Strange, solicitor-general of Great 

Britain, 33. 
Stuart, John, member of the coun- 
cil, 389 ; superintendent of In- 
dian affairs, 224, 227, 389. 
Success, ship of war, 189. 
Superintendent of Indian affairs, 
222-227, see table of contents; 
list of, 416. 
Surveyors-General of lands, list of, 
413. 

Talbot, solicitor-general of Great 
Britain, 36. 

Taxation, 279-329. See table of 
contents. 

Tax certificates, 277-278; issued 
on sole responsibility of the as- 
sembly, 278, 393-394. 

Taylor, Captain Peter, sent as 
commissioner to Georgia, 219; 
commissary general, 411. 

Tendencies in colonial history, 1. 

Thompson, Major William, com- 
mander of rangers, 186. 



Tipper's bastion, 205. 

Tonnage duties paid in powder, 
288. 

Townshend, Charles, 70. 

Trade and Navigation Acts, 148, 
153-154. 

Treason, parliament resolves that 
colonial cases shall be tried in 
England, 366-367. 

Treasurer, Public, disputes over 
election of, 15-17, 312-313; list 
of treasurers, 411. 

Trewin, William, opposes land 
speculators, 43-44; is persecuted, 
47 ; elected to the assembly, 301 ; 
judge of vice-admiralty, 414. 

Trott, Nicholas, chief justice, ad- 
vises proprietors to refuse con- 
cessions to the people, 12; holds 
monopoly of judicial positions, 
13; on commission to try 
pirates, 151; attorney for Land- 
grave Smith, 252 ; mentioned, 
121-122, 125, 160, 289. 

Troops, regular in Charleston, dis- 
pute over furnishing of supplies, 
358-359. See Independent com- 
panies and Royal American 
Regiment. 

Tryon, Rowland, colonial agent, 
415. 

Turner, Matthew, 152. 

Tuscarora bills, issued to meet the 
expenses of the Tuscarora War, 
232. 

Tynte, Edward, governor, 31. 

Union, growth of the sentiment of 
colonial, 366, 386, 402-407. See 
table of contents. 

Union county, 184. 

Unity of colonial history, 1. 

Upper country, need of courts in, 
133-134, 365; organization of 
the Regulators, 133, 137; cir- 
cuit courts established, 133-141. 

Vanderdussen, Alexander, goes to 
England to solicit the service 
of independent troops, 194; ap- 



440 



INDEX 



pointed lieutenant-colonel of 
troops and member of the coun- 
cil, 194. 

Vanderhorst creek, 198, 199. 

Veto, rarely used by the governor 
in the case of money bills, 321. 

Virginia, members of assembly re- 
ceive pay in, 115; independent 
troops removed to, 195; dispute 
with South Carolina in regard 
to the Indian trade, 216-217; 
House of Burgesses passes reso- 
lutions protesting against the 
treasons act, 367, approved by 
the South Carolina assembly, 
367-368 ; Burgesses approve 
Massachusetts circular letter of 
1768 and send out similar one, 
360-361, approved by South 
Carolina assembly and ordered 
printed, 362-364 ; Burgesses 
adopt resolutions originating 
intercolonial committees of 
correspondence, 403. 

Waities, William, popular leader 
in the riots of 1727, 247; re- 
elected to the assembly, 267. 

Wando precinct, 146. 

Waring, Thomas, member of the 
council, 271, 315. 

W^assamsaw in Berkeley county, 
145, 146. 

Watch, Charleston, 178-179. 

Watts, captain of rangers, 186. 

West Indies, coins brought from 
in trade, 230-231. 

West, Joseph, governor, 172, 196, 
213; landgrave, 35. 

West, Eichard, counsel to the 
Board of Ttade, opinion denying 
right of the governor to sit in 
the legislative council, 92; re- 
port on Indian trade act, 216- 
217. 

Whitaker, Benjamin, member and 
speaker of the assembly. 111, 
267, 301, 415; attorney-general, 
412; chief justice, 413; judge of 
vice-admiralty, 414; reports to 



the Board of Trade on the quit 
rent act (of 1731), 39-40, (of 
1744), 65-66; letter to Henry 
McCulloh discussing the juris- 
diction of the law courts, 131- 
132, suggests that the courts 
pass upon the constitutionality 
of laws, 132; mentioned, 47, 69, 
154, 236. 

White Point Garden, watch house 
erected in, 198. 

Wilkes fund controversy, dispute 
over contribution to the fund 
to pay the debts of John Wilkes, 
170, 369-386. See table of con- 
tents. 

Wilkinson, Captain, cacique, 35. 

Williamson, William, deputy pro- 
vost marshal, 412. 

Willtown, 145. 

Windmill Point, 197. 

Winyaw, Indian trading post, 214. 

Wood, Adam, deputy provost mar- 
shal, 412. 

Workhouse, location of, 200-201. 

Wragg, Joseph, member of the 
council, 271, 315. 

Wragg, Samuel, agent in Eng- 
land, 163, 415. 

Wragg, William, member of the 
assembly, 343; opposes non- 
importation agreement, 369. 

Wraxall, Petei', secretary for In- 
dian affairs, proposes plan for 
management of Indians, 223- 
224. 

Wright, James, son of Robert 
Wright, attorney-general, 412; 
agent in England, 169, 416; 
lieutenant-governor and gover- 
nor of Georgia, 169 and note. 

Wright, Robert, member of the 
council, 271, 315; chief baron of 
the court of exchequer, 156; chief 
justice, 43, 413; opposes the 
land speculators and defends the 
Habeas Corpus Act, 43-45; dis- 
pute over payment of salary, 
45-46, 295-302; mentioned, 77, 
129, 130; death, 315. 



INDEX 



441 



Wright, Thomas, son of Robert 
Wright, member of the assem- 
" bly, 104; probable author of 
article in the Gazette question- 
ing the right of the council to 
sit as an upper house, 325-327, 
388; mentioned, 351. 

Yeamans, Sir Jolm, 4; hindgrave, 

34. 
Yemassee Indians, war with 

(1715), 12, 172, 208; bills of 



credit issued to meet expenses 
of war, 233. 

Yerworth, John, shipwright, 188. 

Yonge, Francis, agent in England, 
13, 161-163, 299, 415, 416; mem- 
ber of the council, 271; defends 
privileges of the assembly, 45; 
chief justice, 123, 413. 

York county, 213. 

Yorke, attorney-general for the 
crown, 36. 



The Foundations of American 
Foreign Policy 

WITH A WORKING BIBLIOGRAPHY 
By ALBERT BUSHNELL HART 

Professor of History, Harvard University ; Author of " American 
History told by Contemporaries,^^ etc. 

Cloth. 12mo. $1.50, net 

"A very good introduction to thie wtiole subject. There are seven chapters com- 
prising as many diplomatic phases: The United States as a World Power, The Exper- 
ience of the United States in Foreign Military Expeditions, Boundary Controversies, 
A Century of Cuban Diplomacy, Colonies, What tlie Founders of the Union thought 
concerning Territorial Problems, and the Monroe Doctrine. To these is added a 
vrorking bibliography of American diplomacy, sure to be helpful to those who wish to 
pursue the subject systematically."— 67. fjouis Post- Dispatch. 

"This book is of great value to students and statesmen, editors and politicians, 
being a complete resume of the diplomacy ol this government from the time it threw 
ofl the yoke and took its place as an independent nation. Professor Hart is a very 
clear, concise, and interesting writer, and he not only recapitulates the facts of his- 
tory, but arranges and compares them in such a way that his readers can easily follow 
the trend of American \Aea.s."—Nebraitka State Journal. 

" Lucidly written, and the conclusions reached are indisputable. . . . The book 
may be commended to 'anti-imperialists' for their in^ruction. Yet it is not contro- 
versial in tone or partisan in its arguments; it contains simply the results of profound 
historical knowledge. A bibliography adds greatly to its yaXxxe."— Providence Journal. 



American Diplomatic Questions 

By JOHN B. HENDERSON, Jr. 

Cloth. 8vo. 3.50, net 

" Of vast practical service to every American who gives to the great international 
questions of his country the attention they deserve, nor, indeed, does its usefulness 
stop there. It will be found as serviceable in Europe, though there, naturally enough, 
its use will be restricted to diplomatic circles, members of parliaments, editorial 
writers, and a limited number of students of international affairs, whereas with us it 
is a book for all the people, for all voters, who may be called upon to take into con- 
sideration most of the large issues here involved, which are of the present and the 
future, as well as of the past. The book deals with the fur seals and the Behring Sea 
Award; the inter-oceanic canal problem; the Samoan question, now settled to our 
entire satisfaction, and, therefore, at present at least, strictly historic ; the Monroe Doc- 
trine, with special reference to the Venezuelan boundsry dispute ; and the northeast 
coast fisheries--a problem that is gradually adjusting it.self without diplomatic inter- 
ference."— T/ie Mail and Express (New York). 



The Macmillan Company 

66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



The History of South Carolina under the Pro= 
prietary Government, 1670=1719 

The History of South Carolina under the Royal 
Government, 1719=1776 

The History of South Carolina in the Revo= 
lution, 1775-1780 

The History of South Carolina in the Revo= 
lution, 1780=1783 

8vo. Cloth. Gilt top. Each S3.50, net 

By Edward McCkady, a Member of the Bar of Charleston, S. C, and President of the 

Historical Society of South Carolina. 

"Unquestionably a valuable contribution to American hlBtorioal literature. It 
covers a field that no one else has hitherto attempted to adequately treat of. It evi- 
dences a vast amount of research into musty archives and an instinct that guided the 
author to a discriminating selection ot material. . . . The future must surely be 
indebted to Mr. McCrady in no mean degree." — St. Louis Globe-Democrat. 



Reconstruction in Mississippi 

By James W. Garner, Ph.M., Member of the Missiasippi Historical Society. Cloth. 

8vo. S3.00, net. 

"The latest and one of the most valuable examples of pacific literature which 
is eradicating the bitterness from our national history. It has taken over 400 pages 
to enable Mr. Garner to tell the story of that time of distrust and calamity, and even 
with so generous an allowance of space he has not been able to permit himself much 
comment, but has packed every page with facts, taking the pains in each instance to 
give his authorities for statements made. . . . The story that follows is one of 
arrogance upon both sides, of frailty and passion, indignation, eourage, conscience, 
fanaticism, nobility and contemptibillty. Mr. Garner has made the dry records of the 
legislature and newspapers tell their dramatic story, and it will be impossible for any 
American to read it without sympathy. . . . It is a valuable chapter of American 
history, and should have no lack of readers."— C7iica<7o Tribnne. 



Maryland as a Proprietary Province 

By Newton D. Mereness, Sometime University Fellow in History in Columbia Uni 

versity. Cloth. 8vo. 83.00, net. 

" We cannot speak too highly of the way in which this work has been done. Dr. 
Mereness has studied every point in the light of the original contemporary docu- 
ments, printed and in manuscript, not only those in the archives of the State, but 
those in private collections ; and references to the authorities confirm every state- 
ment. The labor undergone has been great ; but the result is a work planned and 
carried out in the truest historical spirit, and invaluable to the student of Americiin 
history and institutional development'.' — The Nation. 



The Macmillan Company 

66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



